Conspiracy Case Laws Flashcards
Mulcahy v R
“A conspiracy consists not merely in the intention of two or more, but in the agreement of two or more to do an unlawful act, or to do a lawful act by unlawful means. So long as such a design rests in intention only it is not indictable. When two agree to carry it (the intended offence) into effect, the very plot is an act in itself
R v Sanders
“A conspiracy does not end with the making of the agreement. The conspiratorial agreement continues in operation and therefore in existence until it is ended by completion of its performance or abandonment or in any other manner by which agreements are discharged”.
R v White
Where you can prove that a suspect conspired with other parties (one or more people) whose identities are unknown, that suspect can still be convicted even if the identity of the other parties is never established and remains unknown.
What are the 3 ‘must know’ case laws for Conspiracy
- Mulcahy v R
- R v Sanders
- R v White
Additional Case laws (of note).
- Poynter v Commerce Commission
- R v Darwish
- R v Humphries
Poynter v Commerce Commission
Reinforced the position that New Zealand courts had no jurisdiction over a conspirator who enters into the conspiracy abroad and who never comes to New Zealand
R v Darwish
The Court in R v Darwish , a drug related matter, held that where a conspiracy is made between parties in New Zealand and another country, the courts will likely take the view that the conspiracy was formed in both countries simultaneously, and given New Zealand is one of those countries in which the conspiracy falls, it would lie within the jurisdiction of the New Zealand courts.
R v Humphries
Although in R v Humphries it was suggested “it may be appropriate to include a charge of conspiracy where a charge of the substantive offence does not adequately represent the total criminality.”
What are the 3 ‘must know’ case laws
- Mulcahy v R
- R v Sanders
- R Sanders
