Document ID: chunk:federal_register_of_legislation:C2025C00060:section:5:p7
Version: federal_register_of_legislation:C2025C00060
Segment Type: section
Provision Reference: s 5 (pt 7/31)
Character Range: 52380–55146

any part of a defence is based on actual knowledge or belief;
evidence of self‑induced intoxication cannot be considered in determining whether that knowledge or belief existed.
 (5) A fault element of basic intent is a fault element of intention for a physical element that consists only of conduct.
Note: A fault element of intention with respect to a circumstance or with respect to a result is not a fault element of basic intent.

8.5  Involuntary intoxication
  A person is not criminally responsible for an offence if the person's conduct constituting the offence was as a result of intoxication that was not self‑induced.

Division 9—Circumstances involving mistake or ignorance

9.1  Mistake or ignorance of fact (fault elements other than negligence)
 (1) A person is not criminally responsible for an offence that has a physical element for which there is a fault element other than negligence if:
 (a) at the time of the conduct constituting the physical element, the person is under a mistaken belief about, or is ignorant of, facts; and
 (b) the existence of that mistaken belief or ignorance negates any fault element applying to that physical element.
 (2) In determining whether a person was under a mistaken belief about, or was ignorant of, facts, the tribunal of fact may consider whether the mistaken belief or ignorance was reasonable in the circumstances.

9.2  Mistake of fact (strict liability)
 (1) A person is not criminally responsible for an offence that has a physical element for which there is no fault element if:
 (a) at or before the time of the conduct constituting the physical element, the person considered whether or not facts existed, and is under a mistaken but reasonable belief about those facts; and
 (b) had those facts existed, the conduct would not have constituted an offence.
 (2) A person may be regarded as having considered whether or not facts existed if:
 (a) he or she had considered, on a previous occasion, whether those facts existed in the circumstances surrounding that occasion; and
 (b) he or she honestly and reasonably believed that the circumstances surrounding the present occasion were the same, or substantially the same, as those surrounding the previous occasion.
 Note: Section 6.2 prevents this section applying in situations of absolute liability.

9.3  Mistake or ignorance of statute law
 (1) A person can be criminally responsible for an offence even if, at the time of the conduct constituting the offence, he or she is mistaken about, or ignorant of, the existence or content of an Act that directly or indirectly creates the offence or directly or indirectly affects the scope or operation of the offence.
 (2) Subsection (1) does not apply, and the person is not criminally responsible