Anastasia Qvist is an outstanding lawyer. My criminal law situation (family violence order) was difficult, complex and Ana's diligence saved me as I was going through the most difficult period of my life. Ana is down to earth, commonsense and she even kept our costs to a minimum. She is a skilled litigator and knows the ins and outs of the ACT Magistrates Court. She dealt skillfully with the DPP and is an excellent negotiator. You will get a fair representation and she genuinely cares about her clients. She has my complete recommendation. The lady goes to bat for her clients.
I would strongly recommend Anastasia to anyone who is seeking legal representation. As a first-time offender who was charged with a Level 2 Drink Driving offence, she walked me through every step of the matter and was very upfront and clear on all aspects of my case. She was always accessible when I needed advice. Her approach and advice were excellent. Under her representation, I received the best possible outcome and managed to avoid a criminal conviction. She was a pleasure to deal with throughout the whole matter.
Anastasia Qvist was very professional and helpful in every step of my matter. I got a very good outcome and I can’t thank you enough for your hard work and the Armstrong Legal team in Canberra. I would highly recommend her!!!
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.
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.
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.
"Andrew Tiedt was very professional and considerate to personal circumstances and gave sound advice that resulted in the best outcome possible. Highly recommended."
Causing Dog To Inflict GBH
In New South Wales it is an offence to do something which causes a dog to attack another person, causing that person really serious injury. The offence is known as causing dog to inflict grievous bodily harm. The maximum penalty for causing dog to inflict grievous bodily harm is 10 years imprisonment.
The Offence of Causing Dog to Inflict Grievous Bodily Harm
The offence of is contained in s 35A(1) of the Crimes Act 1900 and states:
A person who:
- Has control of a dog, and
- Does any act that causes the dog to inflict grievous bodily harm on another person, and
- Is reckless as to the injury that may be caused to a person by the act,
is guilty of an offence.
Maximum penalty: Imprisonment for 10 years.
What Actions Might Constitute Causing Dog to Inflict GBH?
Examples of this offence include:
- Tormenting a dog, getting the dog angry and directing the dog to attack a person; or
- Letting a dangerous or aggressive dog that is barking incessantly at a person off its leash.
What the Police Must Prove
To convict a person the prosecution must prove each of the following matters beyond a reasonable doubt:
- That they had control of a dog;
- That they did an act;
- That the act caused the dog to inflict harm on another person;
- That the harm amounted to grievous bodily harm (really serious injury); and
- That either the accused intended for the dog to inflict grievous bodily harm or were reckless as to what injury might be caused to the person.
A person charged with this offence may argue in their defence that:
- They did not have control of the dog;
- The dog did not cause harm that amounts to GBH;
- They acted in self-defence;
- They did not act intentionally or recklessly.
The offence will likely be dealt with in the Local Court, however the DPP or the defendant can elect to have the matter dealt with in the District Court.
If you require legal advice or representation in any legal matter, please contact Armstrong Legal.
In New South Wales, the offences of affray, riot and violent disorder involve violent conduct towards other people, or property,…
Is blackmail a crime? The answer is yes. The offence of blackmail is committed when one person makes a demand…
Manslaughter is closely related to the more serious offence of murder. Both murder and manslaughter are homicide offences, which are…
WHERE TO NEXT?
If you suspect that you may be under investigation, or if you have been charged with an offence, it is vital to get competent legal advice as early as possible. Our lawyers are highly specialised in criminal law and will be able to guide you through the process while dealing with the various authorities related to your matter.
WHY CHOOSE ARMSTRONG LEGAL?
201 Elizabeth Street
Sydney NSW 2000
575 Bourke Street
Melbourne VIC 3000
91 North Quay
Brisbane QLD 4000
Nishi, 2 Phillip Law Street
Canberra ACT 2601
111 St Georges Terrace
Perth WA 6000