Case Law

Question 1

R v Taisalika

Answer 1

Intent

The nature of the blow and the gash which it produced point strongly to the presence of the necessary intent.

Question 2

R v Collister

Answer 2

Intent

Circumstantial evidence from which an offenders intent may be inferred can include

The offenders actions and words before, during and after the event

The surrounds circumstances

The nature of the act itself

Question 3

DPP v Smith

Answer 3

GBH

Bodily harm needs no explanation and grevious means no more and no less than really serious.

Question 4

R v Waters

Answer 4

Wounds

A wound is a breaking of the skin evidenced by the flow of blood. May be internal or external.

Question 5

R v Rapana and Murray

Answer 5

Disfigures

Disfigures covers not only permanent damage but also temporary damage.

Question 6

R v McArthur

Answer 6

Injure

Bodily Harm includes any hurt or injury calculated to interfere with the health or comfort of the victim. It need not be permanent but must be more than transitory and trifling.

Question 7

Cameron v R

Answer 7

Recklessness

Reckless is established if the Defendant recognised that there was a real possibility that his or her actions would bring about the proscribed result and / or that proscribed circumstances existed and have regard to that risk those actions were unreasonable.

Question 8

R v Tipple

Answer 8

Recklessness

Recklessness requires that the offender know of, or have a conscious appreciation of the relevant risk and it may be said that it requires a deliberate decision to run the risk.