Police Doorknocking in Comparative and Constitutional Perspective: Roy v O’Neill

Sydney Law Review, Volume 42(3), 2020 Advance

U of Melbourne Legal Studies Research Paper No. 901

11 Pages Posted: 17 Aug 2020

See all articles by Julian R. Murphy

Julian R. Murphy

University of Melbourne, School of Law

Date Written: August 14, 2020

Abstract

Roy v O’Neill, currently before the High Court of Australia, raises the question of whether a police officer can knock on a person’s front door to investigate them for potential criminal offending, in circumstances where the police officer has no explicit common law or statutory power to do so. In order to resolve that question, the High Court will need to develop, or at least refine, the common
law relating to trespass and implied licences. This column explores two issues relevant to the development of the common law in this area, namely: the approach taken to implied licences in other common law jurisdictions; and the influence, if any, that divergent state and territory legislative positions in this area should have on the development of the single common law of Australia.

Keywords: police powers, common law reasoning, federalism, statute and common law

JEL Classification: K00, K39

Suggested Citation

Murphy, Julian, Police Doorknocking in Comparative and Constitutional Perspective: Roy v O’Neill (August 14, 2020). Sydney Law Review, Volume 42(3), 2020 Advance, U of Melbourne Legal Studies Research Paper No. 901, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3673695

Julian Murphy (Contact Author)

University of Melbourne, School of Law ( email )

University Square
185 Pelham Street, Carlton
Victoria, Victoria
Australia

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
473
Abstract Views
1,152
Rank
111,215
PlumX Metrics