Where a police officer exercises a common law power to seize property to prevent a breach of the peace, compliance with s 201(1) of LEPRA is assessed by reference to the objective practicability of providing the required information before or at the time of exercising the power; the prosecution is not required to prove that the officer subjectively formed the view that it was impracticable to comply. The common law power to temporarily seize property to prevent breach of the peace is not limited to property that would itself be used directly in the breach; the question is one of reasonable necessity. The defence of honest and reasonable mistake of fact must be raised by the accused before the prosecution bears any onus of disproving it.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 19 later cases that cite this judgment.
4 of the 19 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.