The defence of extraordinary emergency under s 25 of the Criminal Code (Qld) is not available to a person who produces cannabis over a prolonged period to manage chronic pain, even where the pain is severe and the person believes cannabis is the only effective treatment, because the word 'emergency' imports a temporal element of immediacy that is not met by a long-standing medical condition. The existence of a regulatory scheme permitting medicinal cannabis for certain conditions militates against the defence where the defendant's condition falls outside the scheme. A jury has the power but not the right to return a perverse verdict, and a defendant cannot be permitted to invite the jury to act contrary to law and evidence.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 3 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.