What is the ratio in R v Majewski?

Voluntary intoxication is no defence to crimes of basic intent, but evidence of intoxication may be considered to determine whether the defendant formed the necessary mens rea for specific intent crimes.

What did the court decide in R v Majewski?

The House of Lords upheld the conviction and established the distinction between basic and specific intent crimes regarding intoxication defences.

Why is R v Majewski important for criminal law?

It provides the fundamental framework for understanding when intoxication can be raised as a defence, essential for analysing mens rea in criminal cases.

What is the ratio in R v Majewski?

Voluntary intoxication is no defence to crimes of basic intent, but evidence of intoxication may be considered to determine whether the defendant formed the necessary mens rea for specific intent crimes.

What did the court decide in R v Majewski?

The House of Lords upheld the conviction and established the distinction between basic and specific intent crimes regarding intoxication defences.

Why is R v Majewski important for criminal law?

It provides the fundamental framework for understanding when intoxication can be raised as a defence, essential for analysing mens rea in criminal cases.

Criminal1 min read

R v Majewski

[1977] AC 443House of Lords1977

Cite this case in OSCOLA →All Criminal cases →

“Voluntary intoxication no defence to crimes of basic intent”

Facts

Majewski consumed large quantities of alcohol and drugs before becoming involved in a pub fight where he assaulted a police officer and others. He claimed his voluntary intoxication prevented him from forming the necessary intent for the offences charged.

Issues

Whether voluntary intoxication can negate the mens rea required for crimes of basic intent, and how to distinguish between crimes of basic and specific intent.

Held

The House of Lords held that voluntary intoxication cannot be a defence to crimes of basic intent, but may negate the mens rea for crimes of specific intent.

Significance

This case established the fundamental distinction in English criminal law between basic and specific intent crimes for intoxication defences. It remains the leading authority on voluntary intoxication in criminal cases.

Read the full brief — free

You're reading the free summary of R v Majewski. 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

R v Majewski [1977] AC 443 (HL)

Criminal LawDefencesIntoxication

Read the full judgment elsewhere

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

LLBGDLSQE1BPTC

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.