Beckwith v The Queen

The applicant also submitted that there is no offence of attempting to have goods in possession arising from s. 237 in relation to s. 233B because an attempt to have possession is not intelligible. The suggested offence is not the same as an attempt to acquire possession which is easily understood (see Reg. v. Grant [11] ). It is debatable whether an attempt to have possession is an understandable concept (see the Court of Criminal Appeal in this case [11a] ; People v. Siu [12] , People v. Foster [13] ; cf. Reg v. Grant [11] ). Because of the difficulty in understanding it, an intention to create such an offence should not be attributed to Parliament. When Parliament imposes very heavy criminal penalties, it should be taken as speaking plainly and not as creating offences which can only be understood (if at all)) with very great difficulty.

1. [1975] 2 N.Z.L.R. 165. 2. [1976] 1 N.S.W.L.R. 511; (1976) 26 F.L.R. 401. 3. (1954) 271 P. 2d 575. 4. (1950) 91 N.E. 2d 875. 5. [1975] 2 N.Z.L.R. 165.