Regina v Taaffe: HL 1984

For the purpose of section 170(2) of the 1979 Act a defendant must be judged on the facts as he believed them to be, such matter being an integral part of the inquiry as to whether he was knowingly concerned in a fraudulent evasion of a prohibition on importation. The principle that a man must be judged upon the facts as he believed them to be was an accepted principle of the criminal law when the state of a man’s mind and his knowledge are ingredients of the offence with which he is charged.


Scarman L


[1984] AC 539


Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 170(2)


England and Wales


Appeal fromRegina v Taaffe CACD 1983
The defendant appealed a conviction for having been knowingly concerned in the fraudulent evasion of the prohibition on the importation of cannabis resin. He said he had done so at the request of a someone but that he believed the substance to be . .
ApprovedRegina v Hussain CACD 1969
The only mens rea necessary for proof of any offence of importing drugs was the knowledge that the goods were subject to a prohibition on importation. The accused must know ‘that what is on foot is the evasion of a prohibition against importation . .

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Forbes (Giles) HL 20-Jul-2001
The defendant had been convicted of evading a prohibition on importing articles of an obscene or indecent nature. He had been unaware of whether the articles were indecent images of children, or otherwise obscene images. Since the provisions which . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.


Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.181228