Bell v Tasmania

Bell was the applicant and Tasmania was the respondent in proceedings before the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Tasmania. The dispute concerned the applicant's conviction for an offence under the *Traffic (Miscellaneous) Act 1968* (Tas). The applicant sought to rely on a defence of honest and reasonable mistake of fact, arguing that he held a mistaken belief about a relevant fact which, if true, would have rendered his conduct lawful.

The central legal issue before the Full Court was whether the defence of honest and reasonable mistake of fact was available to the applicant in the circumstances of the offence charged. Specifically, the Court had to determine if the applicant's mistaken belief, even if honestly and reasonably held, could negate criminal liability for the offence under the *Traffic (Miscellaneous) Act 1968* (Tas), given that the act itself was criminal regardless of any mistaken belief.

The Court reasoned that the defence of honest and reasonable mistake of fact is not available where the statute creating the offence does not contemplate such a defence, and where the act itself is inherently criminal. Applying this principle, the Court found that the offence charged was one where the *mens rea* was not an element that could be displaced by a mistake of fact. Therefore, the applicant's mistaken belief, even if honest and reasonable, did not excuse the commission of the crime. The Court dismissed the appeal.