Case Law Flashcards
CAMERON v R (2017)
Recklessness
Recklessness is established if:
(a) the defendant recognised that there was a real possibility that:
(i) his 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 ARCHER (2009)
“Damaged”
Property may be damaged if it suffers permanent or temporary PHYSICAL HARM, or permanent or temporary IMPAIRMENT of its USE or VALUE
R v MORLEY (2009)
“Loss”
Loss… is assessed by the extent to which the COMPLAINANT’S POSITION prior to the (offence) has been DIMINISHED or IMPAIRED.
R v HARPUR (2010)
Attempts
The Court may have regard to the conduct viewed cumulatively up to the point when the conduct in question stops.
The defendant’s conduct may be considered in its entirety.
Considering how much remains to be done is relevant, though not determinative.
R v COLLISTER (1955)
Inferring intent
A defendant’s intent can be inferred from the circumstances. Includes:
The offender’s actions and words before, during and after the event.
The surrounding circumstances.
The nature of the act itself.
HAYES v R (2009)
Nature of Belief Required
The belief is not required to be reasonable or be reasonably held and may be based on ignorance or mistake.
However the reasonableness of the belief may be relevant in determining whether the defendant’s assertion of the belief is credible.
R v WILSON (2008)
“Interest” in property
Tenancy of a property is an “interest”
“Interest” is not defined in legislation.
R v HALLAM (1957)
S 27 - Knowingly Possessing Explosives
The prosecution must prove that the defendant knew what the substance was.
“On a charge of knowingly having possession of an explosive substance, it must be proved that the offender knowingly had the substance in his possession and knew it to be an explosive substance.”
