Robbery - Case Law Flashcards
Claim of Right
R v Skivington
“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.”
Taking
R v Lapier
Robbery is complete the instant the property is taken, even if possession by the thief is only momentary.
Possession
R v Cox
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.
Accompanied by
R v Maihi
“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 …”
Violence
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”.
GBH
DPP v Smith
“Bodily harm” needs no explanation and “grievous” means no more and no less than “really serious”.
Together with
Physical proximity
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.”
Together with
Joint enterprise
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.”
