Call Our National Legal Hotline

Open 7am - Midnight, 7 days

Or have our lawyers call you:

With a cramped time frame, she did in 3 days what another firm dilly-dallied for 7 months. Lisa kept me informed. Helena made me feel comfortable in a sticky situation.

- Client

I will definitely be using your company in the future if needed. Lisa kept me at ease also there were no grey areas with great advice. Helana is a great front of house.

- Client

My legal matter concerning an application for a Domestic Violence Order was managed by Mr Thomas Allen. I am grateful for the outcome he obtained. Without Mr Allen and his ongoing support, I would be certain of a different result. It has been an extremely stressful period. Mr Allen’s astute ability to liaise on my behalf and his expertise was invaluable and for which I am grateful as I am now able to move forward. Thanking you

- Client

I would like to take this opportunity to thank Armstrong Legal and specifically Mr Thomas Allen for representing me in my recent case. At the outset, I would like to thank Mr Allen for the very professional delivery of his legal service. From the first time that I met Mr Allen, I was very impressed with his demeanour and delivery as he made me feel at ease knowing the severity of my case. Mr Allen not only gave me the possible positive outcomes of the case but also the realisation of the worst-case scenario as far as sentencing goes. … I will certainly be recommending Armstrong Legal to any of my friends or family needing representation in criminal matters. Thank you so very much.

- Client

Thank you for your representation and help. Fingers crossed for the next step and parole. I just want to say that from the first phone call to your office, your service has been outstanding and have put my mind at ease. I am glad I picked your number to ring.

- Client

Thank you Armstrong Legal, the lawyers that have helped over the past 3 years but more importantly, thank you to Thomas Allen for the major part you and Mr Buckland played. Cannot thank you enough. Cheers.

- Client

Hi all. I would like to thank Ms Lisa Riley for all her help with my legal issues this past month. It was the most harrowing experience of my life and thanks to her expertise, professionalism and knowledge of the law, I came out almost unscathed. I have no hesitation in recommending Lisa Riley and Armstrong Legal if you need help. The service is amazing and the cost was very minimal for the great outcome. Thank you Lisa for helping me in the most difficult time.

- Client

I just want to thank you from the bottom of my heart. My whole life I was thrown away, you made me feel like I did mean something. I could not have asked for a better lawyer. Your compassion and love for your job is inspiring. Your upfront and honesty were muchly appreciated, you are a beautiful person. Thank you for not giving up on me and thank you for all the work you put in. I wish you all the best for the future and I will be recommending you to everyone I know. You're amazing!!!!

- Client

I just wanted to thank you for representing me on Monday, I was overjoyed & relieved with the outcome. I don’t think it could have gone any better. All the best, I hope you got to celebrate this one instead after work, you forever made a difference in my life.

I know I thanked you before we parted company but please allow me to reiterate in writing my sincere deepest thanks for defending me in court today. … Armstrong Legal certainly has a great Lawyer you are a credit to the company and I'm quite sure you will secure a very successful future! … My Kindest Regards and Thanks

- Client

Throughout Angela has been the consummate professional. She maintained a calm, yet strong demeanour remained informative and completely open in her communication and took complete ownership of the situation. We felt confident we finally had an advocate to steer us out of the nightmare we were in, and she did so with great respect and sincerity. I cannot speak more highly of Angela. She has literally rescued our family from what looked very much like a hopeless future.

- Client

Words can’t describe how grateful I am to Trudie Cameron being my solicitor and to Andrew Tiedt presenting my case in the court. They both have been very supportive and amazingly professional and effective. I’ve got an absolutely fantastic outcome I couldn’t even dream about.

- Client

Soon after meeting Andrew I knew he was the solicitor I wanted to handle my matter. He immediately sprang into action which brought me stability and hope during a tumultuous time in my life. Andrew was never afraid to give me straight answers to my tough questions which is a true mark of integrity. He is clearly at ease in the court environment and I believe his calm and measured demeanour went a long way to helping me secure the best result from my day in court. I would certainly recommend you approach Andrew if you need assistance.

- Client

"Andrew Tiedt was very professional and considerate to personal circumstances and gave sound advice that resulted in the best outcome possible. Highly recommended."

This article was written by Michelle Makela - Legal Practice Director

Michelle has over 15 years experience in the legal industry, working across commercial litigation, criminal law, family law and estate planning. Michelle has been involved in all practice areas of the firm and in her personal practice has had experience in litigation at all levels (state and federal industrial tribunals, the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal, the Federal Court, Federal...

The Defence of Self Defence (ACT)

Self-defence is a defence to any violent offence, including murder and manslaughter. If the court accepts that the accused was acting in self-defence, it will dismiss the charge. Once a defence of self-defence has been raised, the onus is on the prosecution to disprove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

Legislation

The self-defence law for the ACT is found in Section 42 of the Criminal Code Act 2002, which provides:

A person is not criminally responsible for an offence if the person carries out the conduct required for the offence in self-defence.
A person carries out conduct in self-defence only if:
- the person believes the conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or someone else; or
- to prevent or end the unlawful imprisonment of himself or herself or someone else; or
- to protect property from unlawful appropriation, destruction, damage or interference; or
- to prevent criminal trespass to land or premises; or
- to remove from land or premises a person committing criminal trespass.
The conduct has to be a reasonable response in the circumstances as the person perceives them.
However, the person does not carry out conduct in self-defence if:
- the person uses force that involves the intentional infliction of death or serious harm to protect property, or to prevent criminal trespass or to remove a person committing criminal trespass; or
- the person is responding to lawful conduct that the person knows is lawful.

Burden of proof

The ultimate onus of proof in relation to self-defence does not rest on the accused. In Zecevic v DPP (Vic) (1987) 162 CLR 645, Justices Wilson, Dawson and Toohey said, “It has been clearly established that once the evidence discloses the possibility that the … act was done in self-defence , a burden falls upon the prosecution to disprove that fact, that is to say, to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the … act was not done in self-defence. The jury must be instructed accordingly whether or not the plea is actually raised by the accused.”

The prosecution must show either:

that the accused did not genuinely believe that it was necessary to act as he or she did in his or her own defence; or
that what the accused did was not a reasonable response to the danger, as he or she perceived it to be.

Principles

There are two questions to be answered by the court when self-defence is raised. These are:

- Is there a reasonable possibility that the accused believed that his or her conduct was necessary in order to defend himself or herself?; and
- If there is, is there also a reasonable possibility that what the accused did was a reasonable response to the circumstances as he or she perceived them?

The first question is determined subjectively, considering the personal characteristics of the accused at the time they carried out the conduct.

The second question is determined objectively, assessing the proportionality of the accused’s response to the situation they believed they faced.

The accused must have had a genuine belief they needed to act in the way they did to defend themselves.

The jury is not assessing the response of the reasonable person but the response of the accused. Matters such as the accused’s age, gender, or health can be regarded by the jury (or judge or magistrate).

Pre-Emptive Strike, Retreat and Defence of Another

The defence of self-defence can apply to a pre-emptive strike to an attack. Australian courts have generally found that the belief needs to be reasonable, as objectively viewed.

A person is entitled to use the same amount of force in the defence of another person from imminent attack as they are allowed to use if the attack were aimed at them. This applies regardless of whether the other person is a “relative, friend or stranger”: R v Portelli (2004) 10 VR 259 per Ormiston, JA.

If you require legal advice or representation in any legal matter, please contact Armstrong Legal.

Sydney Office

Level 35
201 Elizabeth Street
Sydney NSW 2000

Melbourne Office

Level 13
575 Bourke Street
Melbourne VIC 3000

Brisbane Office

Level 5
91 North Quay
Brisbane QLD 4000

Canberra Office

Level 9
Nishi, 2 Phillip Law Street
Canberra ACT 2601

Perth Office

Suite 207
22 St Georges Terrace Perth