When can a violation of an applicable statute be excused?

A violation of an applicable statute can be excused when compliance poses a greater danger than violation. This principle stems from the idea that the law is intended to promote safety and welfare; therefore, if adhering to the law would result in a more dangerous situation, a court may allow for the violation.

For instance, if a statute requires a driver to stop at a red light, but doing so would create a risk of harm—such as being hit by an oncoming vehicle—then the driver may be justified in running the red light to avoid that greater harm. This reflects the necessity defense, where the actions taken, although technically unlawful, were necessary to prevent a greater evil.

The other options do not present valid excuses for violating a statute. Being unaware of the statute does not typically absolve responsibility, as individuals are generally expected to know and follow the law. An outdated statute does not automatically render it unenforceable, especially if it is still on the books, and inconvenience is not a valid legal defense for noncompliance with a statute.