How do I decide whether the defense of intoxication can be used for any particular offence?

The first thing that must be established when deciding whether the defence of intoxication is available to an offence is whether the offence is one of basic intent or one of specific intent. Basic intent crimes are ones that do not require direct intent but where recklessness can surfice as the appropriate mens rea, where as specific intent offences require direct intention. Generally where a crime is one of basic intent there is no defence of intoxication. Where an offence is one of specific intent the defence of intoxication may be avaiable. However there are exceptions to this rule. The second thing to be considered is whether the intoxication was voluntary or non-voluntary. This helps finalise whether or not the defence is avaiable. There is much case law to illustrate these rules such as that of Kingston, Hardie and Gallagher