Proudman v Dayman
| Jurisdiction | Australia Federal only |
| Neutral Citation | [1941] HCA 28,1941-0922 HCA A |
| Date | 1941 |
| Year | 1941 |
| Court | High Court |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
88 cases
- Giorgianni v R
-
Ostrowski v Palmer
...in this area. The very existence of the strict liability offence in the present case indicates that, to adopt the words of Dixon J in Proudman v Dayman47, the Legislature was also concerned to ‘cast on the individual the responsibility of so conducting his affairs that the general welfare w......
- Kedah & Perlis Ferry Service Sdn Bhd; PP
-
Chng Wei Meng v Public Prosecutor
...requirements. The availability of this defence was recognized in R v City of Sault Ste Maria (1978) 85 DLR 161, Proudman v Dayman (1943) 67 CLR 536 and adopted by myself in this court in M V Balakrishnan v PP [1998] 1 CLAS News 357. 18 Turning to s 43(4) of the Act, one observed that there ......
Get Started for Free
3 books & journal articles
-
Rape in Victoria as a Crime of Absolute Liability: A Departure from Both Precedent and Progressivism
...in the contextof strict liability offences.56 The Proudman defence was recognised by the High Court in the case of Proudman vDayman (1941) 67 CLR 536.The Journal of Criminal In Proudman, the essence of this defence was expressed by Dixon J:‘As a general rule an honest and reasonable belief ......
-
REQUIREMENT OF FAULT IN STRICT LIABILITY
...defence on the accused. 106 Supra, note 76, at 66. 107 Ibid, at 68. 108 Glanville Williams, supra, note 8, at 151—152; Proudman v Dayman(1941) 67 CLR 536, 541 per Dixon J, 538—539 per Rich ACJ; Bron McKillop, supra, note 8, at 128. The distinction is by no means clear, see also Colin Howard......
-
The Australian Criminal Code: Time for Some Changes
...of the necessary fault element: prosecutorial reliance on s 9.3 Mistake or ignorance of statute law is unnecessary in such a case. 84 (1941) 67 CLR 536. 85 But see CTM v The Queen (2008) 236 CLR 440, in which all members of the High Court accepted the view that absence of reasonable mistake......