Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

DDC November 2020 > Case Law > Flashcards

Case Law Flashcards

1
Q

R V Harpur

A

Attempts

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

R V Mulcahy

A

Conspiracy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

R v Taisalika

A

Wounding Intent

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

R v Harney

A

Reckless

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

R v Tipple

A

Reckless

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

R v Mcarthur

A

Bodily Harm

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

R v Waters

A

Wound

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

R V Tihi

A

Aggravated Wounding (intended to cause harm or expose to risk of it)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

R v Sturm

A

Aggravated Wounding
191(1)a)
Stupefy Definition

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

R v Collister

A

Defendants intent could be inferred from the circumstances

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

R v Archer

A

Arson

Property damage

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

R v Morley

A

Loss

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

R v Crossan

A

Taking away and detaining are separate offences.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

R v Wellard

A

Take Away

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

R v Pryce

A

Detain

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

R v Cox

A

Consent

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

R v Mohi

A

Kidnap/Abduct when offence is committed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

WHAT CONSTITUTES A CONSPIRACY

Not just two or more, but in the agreement of two or more to do an unlawful act, or a lawful act by unlawful means.

A

R v Malcahy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

In assessing the conduct there must be a full evaluation in terms of time, place and circumstance.
Quality of the Defendants acts and the time, place and circumstances in which they occurred

A

R v Harpur

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

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

A

R v Taisalika

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Reckless means the conscious and deliberate taking of an unjustified risk.
Proof the consequence complained of could well of happened, together with an intention to continue the course of conduct regardless of risk.

A

R v Harney

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Recklessness offender know of the risk or have conscious appreciation of the risk and requires a deliberate decision to run the risk.

A

R v Tipple

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Wound, Breaking of the skin with blood flow. Maybe internal or external.

A

R v Waters

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

In addition to (a) - (c) must be shown the Offender meant to cause the specified harm or foresaw that the actions undertaken by them were likely to expose others to the risk of suffering it.

A

R v Tihi

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

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

A

R v Sturm

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

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

A

R v Sturm

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

Defendants intent could be inferred from the circumstances

A

R v Collister

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

Property may be damaged if it suffers permanent or temporary physical harm or permanent or temporary impairment of its use or value

A

R v Archer

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

Loss
Arise from direct loss.
is assessed by the extent to which the complainants position prior to the offence has been diminished or impaired.

A

R v Morley

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

Taking away and detaining are separate offences.

A

R v Crossan

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

Deprivation of liberty coupled with a carrying away from the place where the victim wants to be.

A

R v Wellard

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

Detaining is an active concept to keep confined or in custody

A

R v Pryce

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

Consent.

Full, voluntary, free and informed given by person in a position to form a rational judgement.

A

R v Cox

34
Q

The offence is committed at the time of taking away as long as at that moment there is the necessary intent.

A

R v Mohi

35
Q

Possession - both a physical and mental element must be proved to satisfy possession.

A

R v Cox

36
Q

It is not necessary to prove the accused intended a permanent deprivation. (Section 210)

A

R v Chartrand

37
Q

R v Pekepo

A

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.

38
Q

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.

A

R v Pekepo - Intent in relation to 198(1)(b) discharging a firearm.

39
Q

‘Use in any manner whatever’ is to contemplate a situation short of actually firing the weapon and to present a rifle too, I think, is equivalent to or means the same thing.

A

Police v Parker

40
Q

Police v Parker

A

‘Use in any manner whatever’

41
Q

Having a firearm ‘with him’ requires ‘a very close link and a degree of immediate control over the weapon by the man alleged to have the firearm with him’

A

R v Kelt

42
Q

R v Kelt - 198B

A

Having a firearm ‘with him’ requires ‘a very close link and a degree of immediate control over the weapon by the man alleged to have the firearm with him’

43
Q

Tuli v Police - Prima Facie

A

Prima facie circumstances are those which are sufficient to show or establish an intent in the absence of evidence to the contrary.

44
Q

Prima facie circumstances are those which are sufficient to show or establish an intent in the absence of evidence to the contrary.

A

Tuli v Police

45
Q

Police v Emerali

A

Usable quantity
. . . The serious offence of . . . possessing a narcotic does not extend to some minute and useless residue of the substance.

46
Q

. . . The serious offence of . . . possessing a narcotic does not extend to some minute and useless residue of the substance.

A

Police v Emerali

47
Q

To import includes ‘to introduce or bring in from abroad or to cause to be brought in from a foreign country’

A

Police v Saxton

48
Q

Saxton v Police

A

To import includes ‘to introduce or bring in from abroad or to cause to be brought in from a foreign country’

49
Q

R v Hancox

A

‘Importation’ in the misuse of drugs context means the introduction or bringing in from abroad or causing to be brought in from abroad

50
Q

‘Importation’ in the misuse of drugs context means the introduction or bringing in from abroad or causing to be brought in from abroad

A

R v Hancox

51
Q

Cameron v R - Drug importation

A

Recklessness in the recognition of the likelihood that the material in question was illicit and an unreasonable disregard of that risk were sufficient to constitute men rea.

52
Q

Importation - Recklessness in the recognition of the likelihood that the material in question was illicit and an unreasonable disregard of that risk were sufficient to constitute men rea.

A

Cameron v R

53
Q

R v During

A

An offer is an intimation by the person charged to another that he is ready on request to supply to that other, drugs of a kind prohibited by the statute

54
Q

R v Brown

A

The making of such an intimation, with the intention that it should be understood as a genuine offer, is an offence

55
Q

R v Koroheke

A

The genitalia comprise of the reproduction organs, interior and exterior . . . they include the vulva and the labia, both interior and exterior, at the opening of the vagina

56
Q

Genitalia definition

A

R v Koroheke

57
Q

Under the objective test the crown must prove that ‘no reasonable person in the accused’s shoes could have thought that the complainant was consenting’

A

R v Gutuama

58
Q

R v Gutuama

A

Under the objective test the crown must prove that ‘no reasonable person in the accused’s shoes could have thought that the complainant was consenting’

59
Q

R v Court (indecency)

A

Indecency means ‘conduct that right-thinking people will consider an affront to the sexual modesty of the complainant’

60
Q

Indecent Assault

A

R v Court

Indecency means ‘conduct that right-thinking people will consider an affront to the sexual modesty of the complainant’

61
Q

R v Leeson

A

The definition of ‘indecent assault’ is an assault accompanied with circumstances of indecency

62
Q

Indecency Def

A

R v Leeson

The definition of ‘indecent assault’ is an assault accompanied with circumstances of indecency

63
Q

An offence where no violence is contemplated and the principal offender in carrying out the common aim uses violence, a secondary offender talking no physical part in it would not be held liable for the violence used.

A

R v Betts & Ridley

64
Q

R v Betts & Ridley

A

An offence where no violence is contemplated and the principal offender in carrying out the common aim uses violence, a secondary offender talking no physical part in it would not be held liable for the violence used.

65
Q

R v Skivington

A

Larceny (theft) is an element of robbery, and if the honest belief that a man has a claim if right is a defence to larceny, then it negatives one of the elements in the offence of robbery, without proof of which the full offence is not made.

66
Q

Claim of right defence

A

R v Skivington
Larceny (theft) is an element of robbery, and if the honest belief that a man has a claim if right is a defence to larceny, then it negatives one of the elements in the offence of robbery, without proof of which the full offence is not made.

67
Q

R v Peat

A

As in the case of theft, the immediate return of goods by the robber does not purge the offence, subject always to the necessary intent existing at the time of taking.

68
Q

Return of Goods

A

As in the case of theft, the immediate return of goods by the robber does not purge the offence, subject always to the necessary intent existing at the time of taking. - R v Peat

69
Q

R v Lapier

A

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

70
Q

Robbery Complete?

A

R v Lapier.

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

71
Q

R v Maihi

A

It is implicit in ‘accompany’ that there must be a nexus (connection or link) between the act of stealing . . and a threat of violence. Both must be present. However the term ‘does not require that the act of stealing and the threat of violence be contemporaneous. . .

72
Q

Connection / link (accompany)

A

R v Maihi

Link between the act of Theft and violence / threat of violence.

73
Q

R v Joyce

A

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

74
Q

At least two physically present at time of robbery or assault.

A

R v Joyce

75
Q

R v Galey

A

‘Being together’ in the context of section 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 preparation of the crime’

76
Q

Being together. Having common intention.

A

R v Galey

77
Q

Hayes v R

Deception pays

A

A pecuniary advantage is ‘anything that enhances the accused’s financial position. It is that enhancement which constitutes the element of advantage’

78
Q

Hayes v R

Valuable Consideration

A

A valuable consideration is ‘anything capable of being valuable consideration, whether of a monetary kind or of any other kind; in short, money or money’s worth’

79
Q

R v Misic

Document

A

Essentially a document is a thing which provides evidence or information or serves as a record

80
Q

Document Definition

A

R v Misic

Essentially a document is a thing which provides evidence or information or serves as a record

81
Q

R v Morley (deception)

A

An intention to deceive requires that the deception is practised in order to deceive the affected party. Purposeful intent is necessary and must exist at the time of the deception.

82
Q

Intent to deceive

A

R v Morely
An intention to deceive requires that the deception is practised in order to deceive the affected party. Purposeful intent is necessary and must exist at the time of the deception.

DDC November 2020 (13 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions