Case Law Robbery Flashcards
R v Skivvington
Larceny (or theft) is an element of robbery, and if the honest belief that a man has a claim of 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 out
R v Lapier
Robbery is complete the instant the property is taken, even if possession by the thief is only momentary
R v Cox
Possession involves two elements.
The first, the physical element, is actual or potential 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
R v Maihi
In ‘accompany’ there must be a nexus between the act of stealing and a threat of violence. Both must be present.
How ever the term does not require that the act of stealing and the threat of violence be contemporaneous
Peneha v Police
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”.
r v Joyce
“The Crown must establish that at least two persons were physically present at the time the robbery was committed or the assault occurred.”
r v tihi
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”.
ddp v smith
“Bodily harm” needs no explanation and “grievous” means no more and no less than “really serious”.
r v galey
“Being together” in the context of s235(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.”
