The availability of legal remedies, including the right to appeal or make urgent applications to a court, is relevant to whether an accused can discharge the evidential burden for the defence of sudden or extraordinary emergency under s 10.3 of the Criminal Code 1995 (Cth). Where such remedies exist, the evidence may be incapable of suggesting a reasonable possibility that the accused reasonably believed that committing the offence was the only reasonable way to deal with the emergency. The defence of self-defence under s 10.4 is similarly constrained where the accused's response is disproportionate to the perceived threat given available lawful alternatives.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 12 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 12 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.