What is the ratio in DPP v Beard?

Voluntary intoxication can negate specific intent but not basic intent, and intoxication is only a defence if it prevents formation of the required mens rea.

What did the court decide in DPP v Beard?

The House of Lords established that intoxication could be relevant to specific intent crimes but upheld Beard's murder conviction as sufficient intent was proved.

Why is DPP v Beard important for intoxication law?

It established the fundamental framework for intoxication defences, including the specific/basic intent distinction that continues to govern this area of criminal law.

What is the ratio in DPP v Beard?

Voluntary intoxication can negate specific intent but not basic intent, and intoxication is only a defence if it prevents formation of the required mens rea.

What did the court decide in DPP v Beard?

The House of Lords established that intoxication could be relevant to specific intent crimes but upheld Beard's murder conviction as sufficient intent was proved.

Why is DPP v Beard important for intoxication law?

It established the fundamental framework for intoxication defences, including the specific/basic intent distinction that continues to govern this area of criminal law.

Criminal1 min read

DPP v Beard

[1920] AC 479House of Lords1920

Cite this case in OSCOLA →All Criminal cases →

“Intoxication can negate specific intent but not basic intent; established key intoxication defence principles.”

Facts

Beard raped a 13-year-old girl and in the process suffocated her, causing her death. He was very drunk at the time and claimed that his intoxication prevented him from forming the intent necessary for murder. He was convicted of murder and appealed.

Issues

Whether voluntary intoxication can be a defence to criminal charges, and if so, in what circumstances and to what types of criminal offences intoxication might negate the required mens rea.

Held

The House of Lords held that voluntary intoxication could negate specific intent but not basic intent. Beard's conviction for murder was upheld as the evidence showed sufficient intent despite his intoxication.

Significance

This case established the foundational framework for intoxication defences in English criminal law. The principles established in Beard continue to govern how courts approach intoxication cases and remain essential for understanding the relationship between voluntary intoxication and criminal liability.

Read the full brief — free

You're reading the free summary of DPP v Beard. Create a free account to unlock the full reasoning, the cited authorities and the verbatim judgment — plus structured briefs for 412,000+ UK judgments.

Create free account Already have one? Sign in

No card required. Free forever.

OSCOLA Citation

DPP v Beard [1920] AC 479

Criminal LawIntoxication DefenceSpecific IntentBasic IntentMens Rea

Read the full judgment elsewhere

Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.

LLB

More Criminal cases

R v Reece Martin Kelly

[2026] EWCA Crim 268

R v Richard Alexander Welsh

[2026] EWCA Crim 466

R v Robert Michael Thomas

[2026] EWCA Crim 305

This case is reproduced verbatim from the public judgment published by The National Archives under the UK Government's Open Government Licence v3.0. If you appear in this case and believe it should not be published — for example because your conviction was quashed on appeal, you have statutory anonymity, or for other privacy reasons — request removal here.