Necessity Knows No Law
- Submitted by: shaanu
- Views: 793
- Category: Other
- Date Submitted: 11/22/2010 01:32 PM
- Pages: 2
- Report this Essay
Necessitas legem non habet legem (Necessity knows no law)
Jus Neccessitates ( law of necessity)
Law of neccessity : An act which is necessary is not wrongful even though done with deliberate intention.
Jus necessitates is a Latin term which refers to a person’s right to do what is required for which no threat of legal punishment is a dissuasion.
the defence of necessity recognises that there may be situations of such overwhelming urgency that a person must be allowed to respond by breaking the law.
In times of necessity a person is not subject to the law and is not called a breaker of law; that is guilty of transgressing the law, even though the person had done other than what law commands.
In criminal law, necessity may be either a possible justification or an exculpation for breaking the law. Defendants seeking to rely on this defense argue that they should not be held liable for their actions as a crime because their conduct was necessary to prevent some greater harm and when that conduct is not excused under some other more specific provision of law such as self defense.
Except for a few statutory exemptions and in some medical cases
[1] there is no corresponding defense in English law.
[2]For example, a drunk driver might contend that he drove his car to get away from a kidnap (cf. North by Northwest). Most common law and civil law jurisdictions recognize this defense, but only under limited circumstances.
Generally, the defendant must affirmatively show (i.e., introduce some evidence) that
(a) the harm he sought to avoid outweighs the danger of the prohibited conduct he is charged with;
(b) he had no reasonable alternative;
(c) he ceased to engage in the prohibited conduct as soon as the danger passed; and
(d) he did not himself create the danger he sought to avoid.
Thus, with the "drunk driver" example cited above, the necessity defense will not be recognized if the defendant drove further than was reasonably necessary to...
Jus Neccessitates ( law of necessity)
Law of neccessity : An act which is necessary is not wrongful even though done with deliberate intention.
Jus necessitates is a Latin term which refers to a person’s right to do what is required for which no threat of legal punishment is a dissuasion.
the defence of necessity recognises that there may be situations of such overwhelming urgency that a person must be allowed to respond by breaking the law.
In times of necessity a person is not subject to the law and is not called a breaker of law; that is guilty of transgressing the law, even though the person had done other than what law commands.
In criminal law, necessity may be either a possible justification or an exculpation for breaking the law. Defendants seeking to rely on this defense argue that they should not be held liable for their actions as a crime because their conduct was necessary to prevent some greater harm and when that conduct is not excused under some other more specific provision of law such as self defense.
Except for a few statutory exemptions and in some medical cases
[1] there is no corresponding defense in English law.
[2]For example, a drunk driver might contend that he drove his car to get away from a kidnap (cf. North by Northwest). Most common law and civil law jurisdictions recognize this defense, but only under limited circumstances.
Generally, the defendant must affirmatively show (i.e., introduce some evidence) that
(a) the harm he sought to avoid outweighs the danger of the prohibited conduct he is charged with;
(b) he had no reasonable alternative;
(c) he ceased to engage in the prohibited conduct as soon as the danger passed; and
(d) he did not himself create the danger he sought to avoid.
Thus, with the "drunk driver" example cited above, the necessity defense will not be recognized if the defendant drove further than was reasonably necessary to...