Arson - case law

Question 1

Intent

Answer 1

R v Collister (1955)
Circumstantial evidence from which an offender’s intent may be inferred can include:
- the offender’s actions and words before, during and after the event
- the surrounding circumstances
- the nature of the act itself

Question 2

Recklessness

Answer 2

Cameron v R
Recklessness is established if:
(a) the defendant recognised that there was a real possibility that:
(i) his or her actions would bring about the proscribed result; and/or
(ii) that the proscribed circumstances existed; and
(b) having regard to that risk those actions were unreasonable.

R v Tipple 22/12/05
Recklessness requires that the offender know of, or have a conscious appreciation of the relvant risk, and it may be said that it requires “a deliberate decision to run the risk”.

Question 3

Damage

Answer 3

R v Archer
Property may be damaged if it suffers permanent or temporary physical harm or permanent or temporary impairment of its use or value.

Question 4

Cause loss

Answer 4

R v Morley [2009]
“Loss … is assessed by the extent to which the complainant’s position prior to the offence has been diminished or impaired.”