R v Taaffe [1984] AC 539

Court: House of Lords

Facts: D mistakenly believed importing a large amount of money was illegal, but it was not.

Issue: whether D’s version of events in which he had erroneously believed the prohibited substance to be currency, if accepted by the jury, should entitle him to be acquitted

Held: Conviction quashed. The court found that a mistake of fact is a valid defence to an attempt charge if the crime itself is not actually committed.

Key Judicial Statement: Lord Bridge stated, "An attempt conviction requires that the crime be attempted as defined by law; a factual mistake precludes conviction if no actual crime is committed."