ABSTRACT
Australian criminal law presumes that defendants are fit to stand trial until proven otherwise on the balance of probabilities. Forensic mental health experts often provide opinions to the court about defendants' fitness, which requires them to understand the legal context within which the court decides the defendant's fitness status. This article outlines important case law considerations to the assessment of fitness in Australia, including the notions that fitness must be evaluated when there is a 'real and substantial question', assessments should be 'reasonable and common sense' and accommodations should be considered when impairments in capacity are evident. The essentially negligible impact of delusions, an unhelpful defence, unmanageable behaviour and poor defendant-lawyer relationship are also considered. Finally, precedent is reviewed for the use of the Presser standards in New Zealand and other pacific jurisdictions.