Binetti v Feasey

The appeal in Binetti v Feasey involves the appellant's challenge against her conviction for speeding offences in the Perth Magistrates Court. The appellant, Binetti, argued that she was entitled to rely on section 24 of the Criminal Code (WA), which provides a defence for an honest and reasonable mistake regarding the circumstances of an offence. Specifically, Binetti claimed that she genuinely believed she was not speeding, due to a mistake in her perception of the speed of her vehicle. The appeal was heard by the Supreme Court of Western Australia.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether section 24 of the Criminal Code (WA) could be invoked as a defence in speeding offences. The court needed to determine whether Binetti's belief about the speed of her vehicle was honest and reasonable, and if such a belief would exempt her from liability. This required a consideration of the objective elements of the offence and how they interact with the subjective belief defence provided by section 24.

The Supreme Court examined the objective elements of the speeding offence, which required proof of exceeding a specified speed limit. The court noted that the defence under section 24 was limited to circumstances where the defendant's belief about the factual context of the offence was honest and reasonable. Given the objective nature of speed limits, the court concluded that Binetti's mistaken belief about her speed did not negate the objective fact of exceeding the speed limit. Consequently, the court upheld the conviction, holding that the appellant's belief was neither honest nor reasonable in the circumstances. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

The court did not make any additional orders beyond dismissing the appeal and upholding the conviction in the Magistrates Court. This decision reinforces the principle that objective elements of an offence, such as speed limits, are not negated by the defendant's honest but unreasonable belief about the circumstances of the offence.