Case law

Question 1

R v Mohan

Answer 1

R v Mohan 1976

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

Question 2

R v Waaka

Answer 2

R v Waaka 24/10/01

A fleeting or passing thought is insufficient, there must be a firm intent or firm purpose to effect an act.

Question 3

R v Taisalika

Answer 3

R v Taisalika 25/06/93

The nature of the blow and the gash which it produced on the complainant’s head would point strongly to the presence of the necessary intent.

Question 4

DPP v Smith

Answer 4

DPP v Smith 1961

“Bodily harm” needs no explanation and grievous means no more and no less than really serious.

Question 5

R v Waters

Answer 5

R v Waters 1979

A breaking of the skin would be commonly regarded as a characteristic of a wound. The breaking of the skin will be normally evidenced by a flow of blood and, in it’s occurrence at the site of a blow or impact, the wound will more often than not be external. But there are those cases where the bleeding which evidences the separation of tissues may be internal.

Question 6

R v Donovan

Answer 6

R v Donovan 1934

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, no doubt, be more than merely transitory and trifling.

Question 7

R v Harney

Answer 7

R v Harney 1987

(Recklessness involves) foresight of dangerous consequences that could well happen, together with an intention to continue the course of conduct regardless of the risk.

Question 8

R v Tihi

Answer 8

R v Tihi 1989

In addition to one of the specific intents outlined in paragraphs (a), (b) or (c), it must be shown that the offender either meant to cause the specified harm or foresaw that the actions undertaken by him were likely to expose others to the risk of suffering it.

Question 9

R v Sturm Sec 191

Answer 9

R v Sturm 2007

Under section 191 (1)(a) it is not necessary for the prosecution to prove the intended crime was actually subsequently committed.

Question 10

R v Wati

Answer 10

R v Wati 1985

There must be proof of the commission or attempted commission of a crime either by the person committing the assault or by the person whose arrest or flight he intends to avoid or facilitate.

Question 11

R v Sturm

Stupefy

Answer 11

R v Sturm 2007

To stupefy means to cause an effect on the mind or nervous system of a person which really seriously interferes with that persons mental or physical ability to act in a way which might hinder an intended crime.

Question 12

R v Crossan

Answer 12

R V Crossan 1943

Incapable resistance includes a powerlessness of the will as well as a physical incapacity.