Brett Richardson v Regina

Brett Richardson has appealed against his conviction for grievous bodily harm, reckless affray, and assault occasioning actual bodily harm. The appeal was heard by the Court of Appeal. The main issues before the court were whether the appellant's actions were justified under self-defence, and whether self-induced intoxication should be taken into account when assessing the reasonableness of the appellant's response. The court was also required to consider the principles of criminal law applicable to the case, including the test for self-defence, the necessity of the conduct in self-defence, and the reasonable response in the circumstances as perceived by the appellant.

The court found that the appellant had not acted in self-defence and that his intoxication should be considered in assessing the reasonableness of his response. The court held that the appellant's actions were not justified under self-defence as he had not perceived a reasonable threat of harm at the time of the incident. The court also found that the severity of the appellant's actions was not proportionate to the perceived threat, and that the appellant had not acted in a manner that a reasonable person would have done in the same circumstances. The court further held that self-induced intoxication should be taken into account when assessing the reasonableness of the appellant's response, as it affected his ability to perceive and respond to the situation.

The court allowed the appeal and quashed the convictions. The appellant was acquitted of all charges. The court ordered that the appellant be released from custody, and that a record of the acquittal be made. The court also ordered that the appellant's convictions be expunged from his criminal record.