Case Law

Question 1

R v Taisalika

Answer 1

The nature of the blow and the gash which it produces on the complainants head would point strongly to the necessary intent

Question 2

DPP v SMITH

Answer 2

Bodily harm needs no explanation and grievous means no more and no less that really serious

Question 3

R v WATERS

Answer 3

Wounding is the breaking of the skin, normally evidenced by the flow of blood. The wound will often be external but may be internal as well

Question 4

R v RAPANA & MURRAY

Answer 4

The word disfigure covers not only permanent damage but also temporary damage

Question 5

R v DONOVON

Answer 5

Bodily harm includes any hurt or injury that interferes with the health or comfort of the victim. It need not be permanent but must be more than trifling or transitory

Question 6

R v HARNEY

Answer 6

Recklessness means the conciliatory and deliberate taking of an unjustified risk. In NZ it involves proof that the consequence complained of could well happen together with a continuation of the course of action regardless of risk

Question 7

R v TIHI

Answer 7

In addition to one of the specified intents outlined in a) b) or c), it must be shown the offender either intended to cause the specified harm or foresaw that his actions would put others at risk.

Question 8

R v WATI

Answer 8

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 9

R v PEKEPO

Answer 9

A reckless discharge of a firearm in the general direction of a passer-by who happens to get hit is not sufficient proof. An intention to shoot that person must be established.

Question 10

R v SWAIN

Answer 10

To deliberately remove a dawn off shotgun from a bag after being confronted by police amounts to use.

Question 11

R v FISHER

Answer 11

It is necessary for the crown to prove that the defendant knew someone was attempting to arrest or detain him, otherwise mens rea cannot be established.

Question 12

R v SKIVINGTON

Answer 12

Theft is an ingredient of robbery and if the honest belief that a man has claim of right as a defence, it negates the ingredient and the full offence cannot be made out.

Question 13

R v LAPIER

Answer 13

Robbery is complete the instant the property is taken, even if possession by the thief is only momentary

Question 14

R v COX (possession)

Answer 14

Possession involves 2 elements

1. Physical element - is actual or potential physical custody or control
2. Mental element - is a combination of knowledge and intention. Knowledge that the substance is in his possession and an intention to exercise that possession

Question 15

R v MAIHI

Answer 15

There must be a connection between the act of stealing and a threat of violence. Both must be present but need not be contemporaneous.

Question 16

R v PENEHA

Answer 16

It is sufficient that the actions of the defendant interfere with personal freedom or amount to a violent action producing a powerful effect tending to cause bodily injury or discomfort.

Question 17

R v GALEY

Answer 17

Being together involves two or more persons having the common intention to use their combined force in perpetration if the crime.

Question 18

R v JOYCE

Answer 18

The crown must establish that at least two persons were physically present at the time the robbery was committed.

Question 19

R v CROSSAN

Answer 19

Taking away & detaining are separate and distinct offences. The first was complete when he took her against her will. Then he detained her constituting a new and different offence.

Question 20

R v WELLARD

Answer 20

The deprivation of liberty coupled with a carrying away from the place where the victim wants to be

Question 21

R v PRYCE

Answer 21

Detaining means to keep in confinement or custody and is to be contrasted to mere harbouring or failure to hand over

Question 22

R v COX (consent)

Answer 22

Consent must be full, voluntary, free and informed. Freely and voluntarily given by a person in a position to form rational judgement.

Question 23

R v MOHI

Answer 23

Abduction is complete once there has been a period of detention or a taking accompanied by the necessary intent regardless of whether that intent was carried out.

Question 24

R v WAAKA

Answer 24

Intent may be formed at any time during the taking away, if at the start there is no intention but hen it is formed during the taking, that is sufficient.

Question 25

R v M

Answer 25

The crown must prove that the accused intended to take away or detain the complainant and that he knew that the complainant was not consenting.

Question 26

R v FOREST & FOREST

Answer 26

The best evidence possible in the circumstances should be adduced by the prosecution in proof if the victim’s age.