Cannabis distribution and the limits of shared consumption

Supreme Court · Second Chamber (Penal) · 2016

What the Supreme Court considered and decided

The Supreme Court set aside an acquittal because distribution to a large membership exceeded non-punishable shared consumption. It returned the case for consideration of the defendants’ arguments about mistake as to unlawfulness.

What this helps explain

A conviction was not handed down directly: the court of origin was required to rule on the outstanding defences.

Editorial summary from the official note of the CGPJ. It describes this resolution, without certifying the subsequent evolution of the procedure. It should be read with the legislation applicable to its facts, reforms and subsequent case law.