Case Law

Question 1

R v Taisalika

Answer 1

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

Question 2

DPP v Smith

Answer 2

Bodily harm needs no explanation and grievous means no more and no less than ‘really serious’.

Question 3

R v Waters

Answer 3

A breaking of the skin, evidenced by a flow of blood

Question 4

R v Rapana and Murray

Answer 4

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

Question 5

R v Donovan

Answer 5

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 transitioning or trifling

Question 6

R v Harney

Answer 6

Recklessness means the conscious and deliberate taking of an unjustified risk. In New Zealand it involves proof that the consequence complained of could well happen, together with an intention to continue the course of conduct regardless of the risk.

Question 7

R v Skivington

Answer 7

Theft is an element of robbery and if the honest belief that a man has a claim of right is a defence to theft, then it negates one of the elements in the offence of robbery, without Proof of which the full offence is not made out.

Question 8

R v Lapier

Answer 8

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

Question 9

R v Cox

Answer 9

Possession involves two elements. The first the physical element, is actual or potential physical custody or control. The second, the mental element, is a combination of knowledge and intention: knowledge in the sense of an awareness by the accused that the substance is in his possession; and an intention to exercise possession.

Question 10

R v Maihi

Answer 10

It is implicit that there must be a nexus or link/connection between the act of stealing and the threat of violence. Both must be present. However the term does not require them to be contemporaneous.

Question 11

Peneha v Police

Answer 11

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

Question 12

R v Joyce

Answer 12

The crown must establish that atleast two persons were physically present at the time the robbery was committed or the assault occurred.

Question 13

R v Galey

Answer 13

Being together in the context of 235(b) involves two or more persons having the common intention to use their combined force, either in any event or as circumstances might require, directly in the perpetration of the crime.

Question 14

R v Wellard

Answer 14

The essence of the offence of kidnapping is the deprivation of liberty coupled with a carrying away from the place where the victim wants to be.

Question 15

R v Crossan

Answer 15

Taking away and detaining are seperate and distinct offences. The first consists of taking the victim away, the second of detaining her. The first offence was complete when the prisoner took the woman away against her will. Then having taken her away he detained her against her will and his conduct in detaining her constituted a new and different offence.

Question 16

R v Pryce

Answer 16

Detaining is an active concept meaning to keep in confinement or custody. This is to be contrasted to the passive concept of harbouring or mere failure to hand over.

Question 17

R v Cox

Answer 17

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

Question 18

R v Mohi

Answer 18

The offence 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 19

R v Waaka

Answer 19

Intent may be formed at any time during the taking away commences without the intent to have intercourse, but that intent is formed during the taking away, then that is sufficient for the purposes of the section.

Question 20

R v M

Answer 20

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

Question 21

R v Forrest and Forrest

Answer 21

The best evidence possible in the circumstances should be adducted by the prosecution in proof of the victims age.

Question 22

R v Tihi

Answer 22

Must be shown the offender either meant to cause the specified harm or foresaw the actions undertaken by him were likely to expose others to the risk of suffering it.

Question 23

R v Wati

Answer 23

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 24

R v Pekepo

Answer 24

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

Question 25

R v Swain

Answer 25

To deliberately or purposely remove a sawn off shotgun from a bag after being confronted by or called upon by a police constble amounts to use of that firearm within the meaning of s.198A, ca 1961