Drage v Pitts

The appeal was brought forth by the defendant, Drage, against his convictions for assault under section 254 of the Criminal Code (WA). The dispute arose from an altercation between Drage and Pitts, which led to Drage's conviction for assault. Drage argued that he used force that was reasonably necessary to remove Pitts, who he claimed had wrongfully remained in his place. The case was heard in the Court of Appeal of Western Australia.

The court was required to determine two primary legal issues. The first was whether an implied licence that allows a person to be present on property had been cancelled, thereby justifying Drage's use of force. The second issue was whether the force used by Drage was indeed reasonable in the circumstances for the purpose of removing Pitts from the premises. The court had to assess these issues in light of the statutory provision and relevant case law on the use of force to remove an intruder.

In delivering the judgment, the court held that the implied licence permitting Pitts' presence on Drage's property had been cancelled by Pitts' unlawful conduct. The court found that Drage's use of force was not excessive in the circumstances and was reasonably necessary for the purpose of removing Pitts from the property. The appeal was therefore dismissed, affirming Drage's convictions.