The criminal law comprises a state response to wrongdoing on the part of the population, proscribing conduct that lies outside of the normal expected conduct of citizens. As such, the criminal law seeks to regulate socially transgressive or unacceptable (criminal) behaviour.In providing a framework of rules to address these behaviours, the criminal law actually comprises two discrete branches: substantive criminal law and procedural criminal law. This chapter is divided into two main sections. Section 1.2 looks at the nature of the criminal law; its purposes, limits and sources. This part examines a number of important issues, such as the purposes of the criminal law, the legitimate limits on its scope and its sources. Section 1.3 examines the notion of criminal responsibility, looking at who may be held liable for a criminal offence and the principles that underlie the state’s obligations in proving an offence.

Drugs are endemic in the criminal law, not the least because many offenders are regular users of them. Understanding drug law and policy begins with understanding the diversity of drug effects. In this chapter, we consider some of the key offence provisions relating to drug crime. From the outset it is important to recognise that the substantive criminal law overlaps heavily with a range of investigative and procedural law, including rules of evidence. For present purposes we are confining the current work to the offence aspects of drug offences and restricting the analysis to unlawful drugs as opposed to the control of medicines. The investigation of crime, especially drug offences, has evolved into a highly complicated field of law and practice, involving intersecting state and federal laws regulating surveillance, telecommunications, controlled purchases and covert investigation. This field of law is highly technical, and beyond the scope of the present chapter.

This chapter considers the circumstances in which a person will be liable for the torts of another person. It primarily looks at the doctrines of vicarious liability (the liability of am employer for the tortious actions of an employee or a principal for the tortious actions of their agent) and non-delegable duties (the circumstances in which a duty arises which cannot be delegated to another person, such as a contractor). Note that there is often advocacy to change the legal position – to extend the legal circumstances in which liability can be extended to a third party – but also note that redefinition of relationships (such as the employment relationship) often requires adjustments in the law.

This chapter covers offences of violence, with the concept of violence encompassing both physical aggression (here termed ‘contact assaults’) and threatening behaviour (‘non-contact assaults’). The latter category includes stalking, intimidation and harassment, offending behaviours that have gained increasing social prominence and recognition by the criminal law in recent decades. Following this, the chapter turns to consideration of domestic violence, the response to which comprises a mixture of substantive and procedural law, and violence against children.Aside from the important common law principles of assault and battery, the offences under consideration here are primarily statutory and are largely, though not exclusively, contained in the states’ Crimes Acts (Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), Crimes Act 1900 (ACT), Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA), and Crimes Act 1958 (Vic)). The title of this chapter reflects the enduring use and influence of common law assault as the base offence of violence and an underpinning concept in many offences of personal violence and other forms of unlawful intimidatory and threatening behaviour.

A defendant wishing to defeat or reduce liability pursuant to a claim in negligence can prove a relevant defence. The key defences are contributory negligence, voluntary assumption of risk, the plaintiff’s own intoxication, engagement in dangerous recreational or unlawful activities, or other statutory defences such as failure to bring proceedings within the time limits prescribed by statute.Contributory negligence is the plaintiff’s own failure to meet the standard of care required for their own protection, where that failure is causally relevant to the injury. The defendant must establish that the plaintiff failed to take reasonable care for their own safety or the protection of their own interests and that this failure was a cause of their harm created by the plaintiff’s conduct. A successful defence of contributory negligence results in an apportionment of the damages between the plaintiff and the defendant.

Criminal law is divided into two general categories. Substantive criminal law is concerned with the declaration of conduct that is prohibited and the calendar of associated penalties. Procedural law regulates the conduct of authorities during the investigative and trial phase of proceedings. The law of criminal procedure is divided into three broad phases: pre-trial, trial and sentencing. Each phase is governed by important policy concerns relating to due process, the right to silence, the liberty of the individual, privacy and equal treatment. Some of these policy concerns will be discussed throughout this chapter. This chapter provides a overview of some of the important aspects of criminal procedure, but readers are encouraged to consult specialists reference texts in their own jurisdiction for detail.We begin this chapter by considering the nature of summary offences, before turning to explore the concept of public peace and its associated relationship with procedure and powers. We then consider the major categories of summary offences relating to public order, before concluding with traffic offences.

The right to property is often classified as a human right demonstrating the fundamental importance attached to the concept of owning property; ‘everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others [and] no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.’ In this chapter, we examine the wide-ranging legal framework that gives effect to this right. In broad terms, at the state level, the framework is primarily concerned with protecting individual property rights through offences such as theft, obtaining property by deception, robbery and burglary. At the Commonwealth level, the framework is concerned with protecting Commonwealth property as well as ensuring that Australia’s obligations pursuant to international treaties are fulfilled. The property offences framework in Australian jurisdictions has been subject to consistent, ongoing reform partly motivated by the challenge of adapting existing offences to new forms of offending.

Trespass is a very old tort that can be used to address wrongs to the person of the plaintiff and also wrongs to the property of the plaintiff. This chapter deals only with trespass to the person, which arises in the case of forcible, direct and immediate injury to the person of the plaintiff.The tort of trespass reflected the interests of the law to maintain peace. Trespass to the person could be used where the plaintiff’s interest in their person – their bodily autonomy, freedom of movement and freedom from apprehension of unlawful touching – has been injured. Unlike the later tort of ‘trespass on the case’ (or ‘case’), which evolved into the tort of negligence, trespass to the person dealt with direct interference. The distinction between ‘direct’ and ‘consequential’ actions can be difficult to draw, as can been seen by the dissent of Blackstone J in Scott v Shepherd. As we will see, even though trespass and case/negligence are two discrete causes of action, the same facts may give rise to liability in both torts.