A class act, an omission or a non-event? Criminal responsibility under section 31 of the Criminal Code (NT)

This article considers the judicial interpretation of the requirement that an omission or event must be intended or foreseen under s 31(1) of the Criminal Code (NT). It argues that, in order to do justice in individual cases, the courts have been driven to interpretations of the provision that are both unnecessarily complex and inconsistent with the interpretation of similar provisions in other jurisdictions. It suggests, therefore, that this provision should be redrafted in order to clarify the mental state necessary for an accused to be criminally responsible for an act, omission or event.