ABDUCTION & KIDNAPPING - Case Law

Question 1

R v Chartrand - Unlawfully

Answer 1

R v Chartrand

Unlawfully means “without lawful justification, authority or excuse”

Question 2

R v Wellard - Kidnapping

Answer 2

R v Wellard

Kidnapping is the “deprivation of liberty coupled with the carrying away from the place where the victim wants to be”.

Question 3

R v Pryce - Detaining

Answer 3

R v Pryce

Detaining is an active concept meaning “to keep in confinement or custody” in contrast to the passive concept of “harbouring” or mere failure to hand over.

Question 4

R v Mohi - offence is complete

Answer 4

R v Mohi

The offence is committed at the time of taking away, so long as there is, at that moment, the nessary intent. It has never been regarded as necessary…. that the Crown should show the intent was carried out.

Question 5

R v Crosson - Taking away

Answer 5

R v Crosson

Taking away and detaining are “separate and distinct offences”. The first consists of taking the victim away; the second, detaining them.

Question 6

R v Cox - Consent

Answer 6

R v Cox

Consent must be “full, voluntary, free an informed… freely and voluntarily given by a person in a position to form a rational judgement”.

Question 7

R v MOHAN, R v WAKKA, R v MOHI - Intent

Answer 7

R v MOHAN

Intent involves a decision to bring about in so far as it lies within the accused’s power, the commission of the offence.

R v WAAKA

A fleeting or passing thought is not sufficient; there must be a firm intent or a firm purpose to effect an act.

R v MOHI

Offence is commited at the time of the taking away, so long as there is at the moment the necessary intent. Crown does not need to show that the intent was carried out.