Skip to main content

10.5 Lawful authority

Commonwealth Criminal Code: Guide for practitioners

10.5 Lawful authority

A person is not criminally responsible for an offence if the conduct constituting the offence is justified or excused by or under a law.

Overview

Chapter 2 contains “all the general principles of criminal responsibility that apply to any offence”: s2.1 Purpose. Accordingly it was necessary to provide a general defence which will excuse or justify conduct which is authorised by law. The law in question must be a law of the Commonwealth: Dictionary. Typical examples for an application of s10.5 are those provisions which confer investigatory powers on police and other officials, and permits for the import or manufacture of weapons, explosives or drugs…&c. The reference to conduct which is justified or excused “by or under a law” recognises that the authorisation may be indirect or implied, rather than explicit.267

As in other defences, the defendant bears the evidentiary burden: s13.3 Evidential burden of proof – defence. Once the defence is raised by evidence, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the conduct was not authorised.268

  1. Lawful authority is not to be confused with the defence of “reasonable excuse” which is recognised in a number of federal offences. See Henshaw v Mark (1997) 95 A Crim R 115 on the distinction between the defence of reasonable excuse and lawful authority under s15D of the Crimes Act 1914. An example of lawful authority is found in Part 1AB, Crimes Act 1914 which is concerned with authorisation of police controlled operations.

  2. Compare s15D, ibid, which placed the burden of proving lawful authority on the defendant.