ACT Criminal Law
National Criminal Law
NSW Criminal Law
QLD Criminal Law
VIC Criminal Law
WA Criminal Law
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!!!!
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
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."
The Defence Of Self-Defence (Qld)
The Criminal Code Act 1899 allows for some use of force if a person is defending themselves, another person or property. The defence of self-defence requires that the person acted in a way that was reasonable in the circumstances and used force that was proportionate to the threat faced.
The Code contains several provisions for instances where the defence of self-defence may apply. A key element of each provision is a requirement for reasonable necessity.
Defence of a person
Under section 271, if a person has been the victim of an unprovoked assault, they can use as much force as is reasonably necessary to defend themselves, as long as the force is not intended to cause death or grievous bodily harm. If the person being attacked believes they will be killed or seriously harmed, they can use as much force as is reasonably necessary to defend themselves, even if that causes death or grievous bodily harm to their attacker.
Under section 272, if a person has assaulted another or provoked an assault from another, and the victim believes they need to use force to defend themselves or they will be killed or seriously harmed, the victim is not criminally responsible for the consequences. This protection does not extend to the victim if they instigated the assault with an intent to kill or do grievous bodily harm, or used force which caused death or grievous bodily harm before the need arose, unless the victim declined further conflict, or stopped it or retreated from it as far as practicable.
Defence of another
Under section 273, in a situation to which self-defence may apply, a person acting in good faith is allowed to use reasonable force to defend a person being assaulted.
Under section 267, a person is allowed to use force to prevent or repel another person from entering or remaining in their home, if they believe the other person is trying to enter or remain with an intent to commit a crime, and that the use of force is necessary.
Under section 277, an owner or controller of land or a building or vehicle can use reasonable force to stop a person from entering, or remove a trespasser, or remove a person behaving in a disorderly way, as long as the owner or controller does not do grievous bodily harm.
Under section 274, a person can use reasonable force to defend their property if a trespasser tries to take it from them, as long as the person does not do grievous bodily harm to the trespasser.
What the court will consider
When the defence of self-defence is raised, the onus is on the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the person was not acting in self-defence. The defence does not have to prove the person was acting in self-defence.
There are four factors a court will consider when assessing the defence of self-defence:
- whether there was an unlawful assault on a person;
- whether the person provoked that assault;
- whether the force used by the person was reasonably necessary to defend themselves against the assault;
- whether the force used was intended, or was likely, to cause death or grievous bodily harm.
The court can take into account, for example:
- any relationship between the accused and the victim;
- prior acts or behaviour of the victim;
- the characteristics, beliefs and state of mind of the accused;
- the proportionality of the actions or weapons used by the accused;
- whether the accused had a chance to retreat but failed or refused to do this.
The High Court case of Zecevic v DPP in 1987 is considered an authority on the defence of self-defence. After an argument with his neighbour, the accused shot the neighbour dead. The accused had believed his neighbour had a knife and a shotgun, which prompted him to retrieve his gun from his home and shoot his neighbour. The accused was convicted, but on appeal to the High Court, a retrial was ordered. Justices Dawson and Toohey set out the requirements for self-defence:
“The question to be asked in the end is quite simple. It is whether the accused believed upon reasonable grounds that it was necessary in self-defence to do what he did. If he had that belief and there were reasonable grounds for it, or if the jury is left in reasonable doubt about the matter, then he is entitled to an acquittal. Stated in this form, the question is one of general application and is not limited to cases of homicide.”
For advice or representation in any legal matter, please contact 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
22 St Georges Terrace Perth