Necessity

The offence of necessity operates similarly to duress. However, this common law defence arises when circumstances (natural or human threats) bear upon the accused. This directly causes the accused to break the law to avoid more serious consequences.

R v Loughnan [1981] VR 443 at [448] outlines the elements for the defence:

The criminal act was done to avoid consequences that would have inflicted irreparable damage or loss upon the accused or upon others whom they were bound to protect.
The accused honestly believed on reasonable grounds that they were placed in a situation of imminent peril.
The acts done out of necessity to avoid peril were not out of proportion to the peril that was to be avoided.

Necessity: About

R v Cairns [1999] 2 Crim App Rep 137 held that an accused will satisfy the defence of necessity if:

Committing the crime was necessary, or reasonably believed to have been necessary to avoid really serious injury or death of themselves or another.
The necessity was the sine qua non of the commission of the crime. This means that it was an indispensable and essential action, condition, or ingredient.
Objectively viewed, committing the crime was reasonable and proportionate having regard to the imminent peril that was avoided or prevented.

Necessity: About

Necessity

R v Cairns [1999] 2 Crim App Rep 137 held that an accused will satisfy the defence of necessity if:

Committing the crime was necessary, or reasonably believed to have been necessary to avoid really serious injury or death of themselves or another.

The necessity was the sine qua non of the commission of the crime. This means that it was an indispensable and essential action, condition, or ingredient.

Objectively viewed, committing the crime was reasonable and proportionate having regard to the imminent peril that was avoided or prevented.