Francis v Rowan [1941] HCA 6

Francis v Rowan [1941] HCA 6

Offences under reg. 42(1)(a) of the National Security (General) Regulations require only intentional endeavour to influence public opinion by words likely to be prejudicial to the efficient prosecution of the war; actual intent to produce the prejudicial effect is unnecessary.

Parties
Appellant; Complainant: Francis; Respondent; Defendant: Rowan
Jurisdiction
Australia
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From a Court of Summary Jurisdiction of South Australia
Outcome
Appeal allowed; respondent convicted
Legal Topics
Mens Rea, Offences Against National Security, Regulatory Offences, Intention in Criminal Law
Criminal Law National Security Law Mens Rea Offences Against National Security Regulatory Offences Intention in Criminal Law

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Francis

Appellant; Complainant

Rowan

Respondent; Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From a Court of Summary Jurisdiction of South Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to prove an offence under reg. 42(1)(a) of the National Security (General) Regulations it is necessary that the accused intend to influence public opinion in a manner prejudicial to the efficient prosecution of the war, or merely that such influence was likely.

Ratio Decidendi

Offences under reg. 42(1)(a) of the National Security (General) Regulations require only intentional endeavour to influence public opinion by words likely to be prejudicial to the efficient prosecution of the war; actual intent to produce the prejudicial effect is unnecessary.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; respondent convicted

Orders

  • Order of magistrate discharged
  • Respondent convicted and fined £25