Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Kable v DPP, [1] is a decision of the High Court of Australia.It is a significant case in Australian constitutional law. The case is notable for having established the 'Kable Doctrine', a precept in Australian law with relevance to numerous important legal issues; including the separation of powers, parliamentary sovereignty, Australian federalism, and the judicial role.
N v DPP [2011] 175 JP 337 per Supperstone J at 32 – there is no authority for the proposition that a reasonable excuse can be decided subjectively. "When a defendant claims that he had a reasonable excuse for possession of an offensive weapon because he believed he was at risk of imminent attack, it is for him to prove both the belief and the ...
Thus, in DPP v Bell [26] the accused successfully pleaded duress of circumstances to driving with excess alcohol because, following an incident in a pub which caused him to fear for his physical safety, he escaped in his car, only driving a short distance to safety and then abandoning the criminal activity as soon as reasonably possible.
As a result, the Prosecution of Offences Act 1879 was passed, which created a Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to advise the police and personally act in cases of importance; an elaboration on the 1856 Act. [4] The first appointee was Sir John Maule QC, who took up his post in 1880. Maule was a quiet, reserved and cautious man, who ...
In DPP v Orum [1989] 1 WLR 88, [1988] 3 All ER 449, [1989] 88 Cr App R 261 the Divisional Court confirmed that police officers are not unable to be victims of section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 caused by swearing and other abusive/threatening behaviour, but this behaviour must be in excess of what the officer is or should be used to.
B.S. v. Director of Public Prosecutions [2017] IESCDET 134; was an Irish Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled on the determination of article 34.5.3° of the Constitution when the Court can grant an allowance for an appeal from the Court of Appeal to the Supreme Court. The ruling declared that the Supreme Court "is no longer a Court for ...
Coker v. Georgia, 433 U.S. 584 (1977) – The death penalty is unconstitutional for rape of an adult woman when the victim is not killed.; Enmund v. Florida, 458 U.S. 782 (1982) – The death penalty is unconstitutional for a person who is a minor participant in a felony and does not kill, attempt to kill, or intend to kill.
Damache contested that the decision to issue a warrant should be made by someone who is unconnected to the investigation and by someone does not receive any benefits from issuing a warrant so that the decision made is fair. The Supreme Court cited a case called The People (DPP) v Birney, where the judge construed the meaning of section 29. [6]