Search Legislation

The Armed Forces (Court Martial) Rules 2009

 Help about what version

What Version

 Help about advanced features

Advanced Features

 Help about opening options

Opening OptionsExpand opening options

Changes over time for: Paragraph 32

 Help about opening options

Version Superseded: 01/08/2013

Alternative versions:

Status:

Point in time view as at 31/10/2009. This version of this provision has been superseded. Help about Status

Changes to legislation:

There are currently no known outstanding effects for the The Armed Forces (Court Martial) Rules 2009, Paragraph 32. Help about Changes to Legislation

Sentence for multiple relevant offencesU.K.

This section has no associated Explanatory Memorandum

32.—(1) This paragraph applies where—

(a)the court convicts a person of two or more SDA election offences; and

(b)section 165(4) applies.

(2) Sub-paragraphs (3) and (4) apply, and rule 161(4) and (5) do not apply, where the joined offences are relevant by virtue of section 165(1)(a) or (b).

(3) If there was one election charge, the sentence may not be more severe than the most severe punishment that the person's commanding officer could have awarded if he had dealt with or tried the election charge summarily and found it proved.

(4) If there were two or more election charges, the sentence may not be more severe than the most severe punishment that the person's commanding officer could have awarded if he had dealt with or tried the election charges summarily, together, and found them proved.

(5) Sub-paragraphs (6) and (7) apply, and rule 161(7) and (8) do not apply, where the joined offences are relevant by virtue of rule 156 (as modified by paragraph 27).

(6) If there was one SDA non-election charge, the sentence may not be more severe than the most severe punishment that the person's commanding officer could have awarded if he had dealt with or tried the non-election charge summarily and found it proved.

(7) If there were two or more SDA non-election charges, the sentence may not be more severe than the most severe punishment that the person's commanding officer could have awarded if he had dealt with or tried the non-election charges summarily, together, and found them proved.

(8) In this paragraph, “the joined offences” and “the sentence” have the same meaning as in rule 161.

Back to top

Options/Help