Google Play App Store

Legal NewsNews Legal BlogsLaw Blogs Branding BlogsJudgements Branding BlogsBranding Blogs All Legal News and BlogsAll Blogs Legal JobsLaw Jobs

IGNORANCE OF LAW VS. IGNORANCE OF FACT IGNORANCE OF LAW VS. IGNORANCE OF FACT

Bronze medal Reporter Adv.Aneeta Posted 5 Dec 2019 Read More News and Blogs
IGNORANCE OF LAW VS. IGNORANCE OF FACT

Most of the countries are frequently revising and updating their laws to replicate our ever-changing society and culture. Even most of the attorneys have difficulty keeping up-to-date of changes in the law, so it is reasonable when the normal citizen is ignorant that existing law has been revised or a new law been enacted. Changes in civil laws can cause citizen misunderstanding about his or her legal rights: changes in the criminal laws of a state, however, can end in conviction, fines, and/or imprisonment. Can a defendant successfully defend him by requesting he did not know the law?

Unfortunately, the fact that you did not know your activities were illegal does not mean you cannot be accused of and sentenced to crime in most cases. The only time that an ignorance of the law can possibly provide a protection to criminal burdens is when (1) the law was recently passed or amended and there was no sensible chance for a person to make him aware of the changes; or (2) you rely on an approved interpretation of the law given by a judge and that interpretation proves to be wrong.

By disparity, if you are assumed to have committed a crime but the assumed actions arose because you were flawed about some fact or situation, this may provide a defence to your criminal charges. Ignorance or a mistake of fact is not a spontaneous defence, yet: you will need to be able to produce some evidence to upkeep your controversy that you reasonably or comprehensibly got the facts of a situation wrong in order for the defence to be effective.

Mistakes of fact stand up when a criminal perpetrator mistook some fact that disproves an element of the crime. A defendant cannot future claim that he was wrong when he truly knew the condition. Similarly, the mistake must be one that would seem sensible to a judge or jury. If the same person was continually told that the goods were not his, and he could not take it, it would no longer be practical for him to mistakenly have understood that he could lawfully take the goods.

It is also significant to note that, while belief on an explanation of an official may include judges or federal or state agencies, it does not include trust on the reports of a private attorney. It is therefore important to confirm that an attorney from whom you gain advice is knowledgeable and up to date.

Note:- We try our level best to avoid any kind of abusive content posted by users. Kindly report to us if you notice any, [email protected]

Copyright @ Pathmpor Consultants Pvt Ltd

F

r

e

e


A

d

v

i

c

e