The judge had been wrong to refused to leave the defence of necessity to the jury. The court gave guidance as to the proper approach. The judge should have asked himself whether there was evidence of such fear operating on the mind of the defendant at the time of the alleged offending as to impel him to act as he did, and whether if so there was evidence that the danger he feared objectively existed, and that the alleged offending was a reasonable and proportionate response to it.
Citations:
[1999] CLR 570
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Fraydon Navabi; Senait Tekie Embaye CACD 11-Nov-2005
The defendants had been convicted of not having an immigration document when presenting themselves for interview. They had handed their passports to the ‘agents’ who had assisted their entry.
Held: The jury should have been directed as to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Crime
Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.237479
