Pages in this set

Page 1

Preview of page 1

Case Critical point Analytical point 1 Analytical point 2 Linked case Further comments

R v Hale 1978 Hale established that COA that the force Placing a hand on the Lockley (1995) indicates It could be argued that
`appropriation' in robbery is a used must be in order victims mouth mounted…

Page 2

Preview of page 2
`Force' is not defined in the Under the Larcneny Act At first instance the trial Clouden held that force `Violence' became
R v Dawson and Theft Act 1968 1916, robbery judge misdirected the can be done indirectly. `force' which did not
James 1977 Force under the theft act is an…

Page 3

Preview of page 3
therefore was not a had not consented D's to decide = increased
burglar. entry inconsistency and
D could only be liable if
An alternative view by uncertainty.
he had entered before Smith and Griew was
being invited. preferred by the COA.
This was that negligence
with regard to entering

Page 4

Preview of page 4
Seekings and For burglary, D must enter the This case is Reference is made in s9 This case is an example Seekings and Gould
`building'. Is a lorry trailer a distinguished from the
(4) to `buildings' or `part of the development of further clarified what
Gould 1986 `building', an `inhabited…

Page 5

Preview of page 5
the restricted area was clearly trespasser if he enters if there was anything Laing appealed and the
shown another part of the worth stealing COA allowed it because
Judges further developed the building without the jury was misdirected
wording of the Act by applying authorisation. The jury was not


No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »