Robbery Case Law

Question 1

R v Skivington

Answer 1

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 to robbery, without proof of which the full offence is not made out

Question 2

R v Lapier

Answer 2

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

Question 3

R v Cox

Answer 3

Possession involves two elements. The first 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 4

R v Maihi

Answer 4

It is implicit in “accompany” that there must be a nexus 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

Question 5

Peneha v Police

Answer 5

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 6

DPP v Smith (Agg Robbery)

Answer 6

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

Question 7

R v Joyce (Agg Robbery)

Answer 7

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

Question 8

R v Galey (Agg Robbery)

Answer 8

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