Bell v Tasmania

The High Court of Australia heard an appeal from Mr Bell, who had been charged with supplying a controlled drug to a child contrary to s 14 of the *Misuse of Drugs Act 2001* (Tas). Mr Bell contended that he honestly and reasonably believed the complainant, who was 15 years old, was over the age of 18. The core of the dispute was whether this mistaken belief could operate as a defence to the charge.

The legal issue before the Court was whether the common law defence of honest and reasonable mistake of fact could excuse conduct that, if the mistaken belief were true, would still constitute a lesser offence under the same Act. Specifically, the Court had to determine the meaning of "innocent" in the context of this defence, and whether Mr Bell was entitled to rely on it.

The Court reasoned that the common law defence of honest and reasonable mistake of fact operates to excuse an accused's conduct entirely, such that if the facts believed were true, the conduct would be entirely innocent. In this case, even if Mr Bell's belief that the complainant was over 18 had been true, his actions would still have constituted the offence of supplying a controlled drug to another person, contrary to s 26 of the *Misuse of Drugs Act*. Therefore, the mistaken belief could not excuse the entirety of his conduct. The Court concluded that the trial judge was correct not to leave this defence to the jury, and the Court of Criminal Appeal of Tasmania was correct to dismiss Mr Bell's appeal.