Voluntary Intoxication

Voluntary / Self induce intoxication is not define in the Penal Code

It involves deliberate or intentional consumption of drinks or drugs to an amount that can produce a state of intoxication

The law of intoxication laid down in Beard (1920) states that:-

Facts: Arthur Beard was indicated for murder having ravished a 13 year old girl and in furtherance of the act of rape placed his hand upon her mouth and his thumb open her throat hereby causing death by suffocation. The defence was drunkenness. On the facts there was no evidence that he was too drunk  to from the intention of committing rape

 

The House of Lords (HOL) ruled that:- 

1. Insanity whether produces by drunkenness or otherwise is a defence to the crime charged 

2. Evidence of drunkenness which renders the accused incapable of forming the specific intent essential to constitute the crime should be taken into consideration with the other facts proved in order to determine whether or not he had this intent.  

3. Evidence of drunkenness failing short  of a proved incapacity in the accused to form the intent necessary to constitute the crime and merely est. that his mind was affected by drink so that he more readily gave away to some violent passion does not rebut the presumption that a man intends the natural consequences of his acts. 

Distinction between insanity produce by intoxication [S85(2)(b)] and unsoundness of mind [S84] is made under Penal Code.

However noted that drafting in Section 85 (2)(b) used is insane and not unsoundness of mind. 

Under McNaghten Rules no distinction is drawn between insanity arising from intoxication or other causes so long as it result in a disease of the mind 

Lord Birkenhead in Beard (1920) said “insanity” whether produces by drunkenness or otherwise is a defence (under the McNaghten Rules) to a crime charged.

So Question, whether the same test shall be apply here in interpreting S85 (2)(b).

Since  S85 (2)(b) is an attempt to incorporate rule 1 of Beard 1920 the test of insanity should be the same as that under English law i.e result of disease of the mind and not unsoundness of mind

In circumstances can intoxication bring about insanity i.e state of disease which causes a degree of madness? The most obvious example is where excessive drinking causes an attack of delirium tremens (delusion caused due to excessive consumption of alcohol)

 

Intoxication and crimes of “intention, specific or otherwise”

Section 86 (2) draws its inspiration from rule 2 of Beard 1920 with some differences in wording.

Relevance of incapacity to form intent

No mention of “incapacity” to form intent in S86 (2) but was mentioned in Rule 2 of Beard 1920

Question: Whether the accused was capable of forming an intention.

Proof of incapacity wills of course negative the mens rea In England today, no requirement that

There must be incapacity due to intoxication to negative the intention to commit a crime.

The prosecution has only to est. that the accused had the intent despite his intoxicated. An

Intoxicated man may be capable of forming intent but may not have the guts to commit the offence.

The onus of proof was on the prosecution to est. that notwithstanding the alleged intoxication the

Accused did form intent

Under the penal code the question of incapacity of the accused is itself relevant in determining his

Intent but relevant in determining whether the accused was or was not sufficiently intoxicated

In Hatchard (1983),  The prosecution is required to negate the argument that the accused person did not have the intent necessary for the commission of the crime due to intoxication. But there must be evidence that the accused was so intoxicated and if this is not available by means of direct evidence the accused person has the onus of producing evdence that he was incapable of forming the necessary intention due to intoxciation.

Administrative Law - 1

Definitions

Administrative Law is the body of law that allows for the creation of public regulatory agencies and contains all of the statutes, judicial decisions, and regulations that govern them. It is created by administrative agencies to implement their powers and duties in the form of rules, regulations, orders, and decisions. Administrative procedure constitutes the methods and processes before administrative agencies, as distinguished from judicial procedure, which applies to courts. In framing this definition powers rather than rights and liabilities are of primary importance. So, administrative law is first and foremost concerned with the discretion which normally accompanies the grant of power. 

Austin regarded Administrative Law as determining the ends and modes to and in which the sovereign powers shall be exercised. They shall be exercised: 

1. Directly by the monarch or sovereign member; or

2. Directly by the subordinate political superiors to whom portions of those are delegated or committed in trust. 

Holland gave Administrative Law as one of his six divisions of public law. The first was constitutional law as dealing with structure; the second Administrative Law as being concerned with function. 

Jennings defines Administrative Law as follows “Administrative Law is the law relating to the Administration. It determines the organization powers and duties of administration authorities”.

Bernard Schwartz in his book “An introduction to American Administrative Law 1985” defines administration law as the law applicable to those administrative agencies which posses powers of delegated legislation and or adjudicatory authority. 

Davies in his “Administrative Law 1951” defines it as the law concerning the powers and procedure of administrative agencies. 

Wade and Philips defines it as the law relating to the organization and service performed by the various administrative agencies of government. It deals with the powers of all such bodies and determines their rights and duties. 

In particular, Administrative Law is the law which governs the relation between the State and the individual. Recording his assessment of Administrative Law, Dicey said that it is the law which determines:

1. The position and liabilities of all State officials;

2. The civil rights and liabilities of private individuals in their dealings with officials as representatives of the State; and

3. The procedure by which these rights and liabilities are enforced.

History of Equity

Equity & Trust

-          Role of Equity in the creation and development of trust

-          Aspect of Equity that is relevant to trust, the concept of; maxims, doctrine, and remedies

Lord Chancellor is the founder of equity which later produces Trust.

King William the 1^st is the 1^st King that unites the English Island. Thus, from different law, the entire districts now were administered by the same law which is called COMMON LAW.

Problems of Common Law:-

1.       Jury System

-          Jury easily intimidated

-          Jury are corruptible

-          Bias 

2.       Writs

-          Expensive

-          Limited writs. I.E: One may sue someone under negligence but if they want to sue under nuisance there is no specific writs for nuisance. So that what is meant by limited writs

3.       Stare Decisis (Judicial Precedent)

-          This precedent has made the law to be rigid.

4.       King is abroad

5.       Remedies

-          The only remedy that is available at that point of time is damages ($). But people didn’t want money. The appreciate land rather than money. Other than that sometimes they want injunction, specific performance and etc.

As a conclusion, the public does not satisfy with the law.

So the Lord Chancellor who sits in the office called Chancellery decided to overcome the weaknesses of the CL.

Among the actions of the LC to overcome the CL problem he has decided to;

-          Remove the jury system

-          Make Writs Cheap

-          Create more types of writs

-          Provide wide range of remedies.

 Who is the Lord Chancellor?

LC is a very powerful man. He is the second man in a state.

LC is a person that is powerful, he’s an English, religious (Catholic) and was a CL Judge.

Problem of Equity:-

The problem with equity is that it’s being judge using the conscience of the LC and the conscience of the CL is based on the criteria mentioned above.

So the king has decided to implement the Judicature Act 1873. Base on the act it is said that Common Law and Equity has been fuse.

Common Law + Equity = Judicature Act 1873

High Court

King’s Bench

Queen’s Bench

Chancellery

 

                   

 

                                                                     Common Law + Equity

·         When there’s a conflict between CL & EQ, EQ will prevail

Welcome

The Law Lords will provide you with guidelines on studying law