We represented a client charged with assault arising from an altercation in the carpark of a shopping centre. The allegation involved a physical confrontation, and the prosecution case relied heavily on brief eyewitness accounts and limited CCTV vision. The client maintained from the outset that he acted only to protect himself.

We conducted a detailed review of the evidence and identified gaps in the prosecution’s version, including inconsistencies in the complainant’s account and the absence of any reliable evidence contradicting the client’s claim that he was first approached and threatened. At the hearing, we advanced the argument that the client’s actions were a proportionate response to the conduct directed towards him and fell squarely within the scope of lawful self-defence.

Through cross-examination and submissions, we demonstrated that the prosecution could not exclude the reasonable possibility that the client believed he needed to defend himself.

The Court accepted this position. At the conclusion of the hearing, the client was found not guilty and the charge was dismissed.

Outcome: Not guilty. Self-defence established.