R v Ah Lin [1909] HCA 23

R v Ah Lin [1909] HCA 23

Possession of charcoal of opium, even when obtained by prescription from a medical practitioner, is unlawful under the Act unless it is a substance compounded exclusively for medicinal purposes.

Parties
Appellant: The King; Respondent: Ah Lin
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 May 1909
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From the Supreme Court of Queensland
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Possession of Opium, Aboriginals Protection and Restriction of the Sale of Opium Act 1897, Substance Compounded Exclusively for Medicinal Purposes
Criminal Law Statutory Interpretation Possession of Opium Aboriginals Protection and Restriction of the Sale of Opium Act 1897 Substance Compounded Exclusively for Medicinal Purposes

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The King

Appellant

Ah Lin

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From the Supreme Court of Queensland

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether possession of charcoal of opium prescribed by a medical practitioner is unlawful under the Act
  2. 2 Whether charcoal of opium is included in the statutory definition of opium

Ratio Decidendi

Possession of charcoal of opium, even when obtained by prescription from a medical practitioner, is unlawful under the Act unless it is a substance compounded exclusively for medicinal purposes.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • conviction restored
  • penalty reduced to 1 shilling by consent of Attorney-General