R v Howe
| Jurisdiction | Australia Federal only |
| Court | High Court |
| Neutral Citation | [1958] HCA 38,1958-0815 HCA A |
| Date | 1958 |
-
- 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
25 cases
-
People (Attorney General) v Dwyer
...... So held by the Supreme Court ( Ó Dálaigh ó dálaigh C.J., Walsh, Budd, FitzGerald and Butler JJ.). R. v. Howe (1958) 100 C.L.R. 448 applied. R. v. McInnes [1971] 1 W.L.R. 1600 considered. Criminal Appeal. On the 4th November, 1969, the defendant was arraigned on indictment and pleaded not guilty to a count charging him with having murdered Philip Ney on ......
-
R v Clegg
...stating the law as they believed it to be. 24 There does not appear to have been any development in the law until The Queen v. Howe (1958) 100 C.L.R. 448 decided by the High Court of Australia in 1958. There was an extensive citation of all the authorities in this corner of the law going ba......
- Da Costa v R
-
The State v Lewis
......375 , per Wooding, C.J., at p. 376 and Palmer v. R. , (1971) 16 W.I.R. 499 per Lord Morris, at P. 376.] And once this is so, then the issue must he left to the jury and the prisoner would be entitled to an acquittal, unless, in the words of Dixon, C.J. in The Queen v. Howe , (1958) 100 C.L.R. 448 , at p. 459, the prosecution satisfies the jury beyond reasonable doubt “that the factual constituents by which such a plea is made out of some of them did not exist.” “In weighing the probative value of the evidence to decide if there was, at ......
Request a trial to view additional results
4 books & journal articles
-
Excessive self-defence and criminal liability
...confirmed the doctrine of excessive defence, refusing to follow the decision of the Privy Council in Palmer.36 29 [1957] ALR 648. 30 (1958) 100 CLR 448. See also Bufalo [1958] VR 363; Haley (1959) 76 WNNSW 550; Enright [1961] VR 663; Turner [1962] VR 30; McNamara [1963] VR 32; Tikos (No 1) ......
-
The Paradox of Disallowing Duress as a Defence to Murder
...of excessive self-defence or excessive-force-manslaughter: R v Bozikis [1981] VR 587; Da Costa v The Queen (1968) 118 CLR 186; R v Howe (1958) 100 CLR 448, but see Zecevic v Director of Public Prosecutions (1987) 71 ALR 641, a case in which the High Court abolished the doctrine under Austra......
-
The Use of Lethal Force by Military Forces on Law Enforcement Operations — is There a ‘Lawful Authority’?
...which analysed and drew upon each other — both with approval and in dissent — including (Australia) R v McKay [1957] VR 560; R v Howe (1958) 100 CLR 448; Viro v R (1978) 141 CLR 88; Zecevic v Director of Public Prosecutions (Victoria) (1987) 162 CLR 645; (UK) Palmer v The Queen [1971] AC 81......
-
Excessive Force in Self-Defence after R v Clegg
...at pp 675--676; see also Viro v R (1978) 141 CLR 88, 153, perJacobs J.21 The People (Attorney General) v Dwyer [1972J IR 416, 429.22 (1958) 100 CLR 448, 465. Stanley Yeo has suggested that these dicta might provide thefuture role for malice aforethought: 'while it may no longer serve a usef......