Waterhouse v R [1911] HCA 20

Waterhouse v R [1911] HCA 20

A person without a certificate may have a property right in opium sufficient for it to be the subject of larceny, notwithstanding statutory prohibitions on possession.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Applicant: Oswald Victor Waterhouse; Respondent: The King
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 June 1911
Procedural Posture
Application for Special Leave to Appeal / High Court Application for Special Leave From Supreme Court of New South Wales Decision
Outcome
special leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Larceny, Possession of Opium, Prohibited Substances
Criminal Law Larceny Possession of Opium Prohibited Substances

Source-derived case record

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 1 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Oswald Victor Waterhouse

Applicant

The King

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Special Leave to Appeal / High Court Application for Special Leave From Supreme Court of New South Wales Decision

  1. 1 Whether opium, the possession of which is prohibited without a certificate, can be the subject of larceny

Ratio Decidendi

A person without a certificate may have a property right in opium sufficient for it to be the subject of larceny, notwithstanding statutory prohibitions on possession.

Court Disposition

special leave to appeal refused