Edited, memorised or added to reading list

on 18-Jul-2016 (Mon)

Do you want BuboFlash to help you learning these things? Click here to log in or create user.

Flashcard 1354560572684

Tags
#co-ownership #land #law
Question
TLATA 1996, s. 13(3) gives the trustees a power to impose reasonable conditions on the occupying beneficiary/beneficiaries (for example, requiring the beneficiary to pay the outgoings or to carry out repairs). However, in exercising their powers under this section, the trustees are to have regard to the factors specified in [Statute]: 1. The intentions of the person(s) who created the trust; 2. The purposes for which the land is held; and 3. The circumstances and wishes of the beneficiaries entitled to occupy the land under TLATA 1996, s. 12.
Answer
TLATA 1996, s. 13(4)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
e occupying beneficiary/beneficiaries (for example, requiring the beneficiary to pay the outgoings or to carry out repairs). However, in exercising their powers under this section, the trustees are to have regard to the factors specified in <span>s 13(4): 1. The intentions of the person(s) who created the trust; 2. The purposes for which the land is held; and 3. The circumstances and wishes of the beneficiaries entitled to occupy

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1354562931980

Tags
#co-ownership #land #law
Question
TLATA 1996, s. 13(3) gives the trustees a power to impose reasonable conditions on the occupying beneficiary/beneficiaries (for example, requiring the beneficiary to pay the outgoings or to carry out repairs). However, in exercising their powers under this section, the trustees are to have regard to the factors specified in TLATA 1996, s. 13(4): 1. [...]; 2. The purposes for which the land is held; and 3. The circumstances and wishes of the beneficiaries entitled to occupy the land under TLATA 1996, s. 12.
Answer
The intentions of the person(s) who created the trust

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
neficiary/beneficiaries (for example, requiring the beneficiary to pay the outgoings or to carry out repairs). However, in exercising their powers under this section, the trustees are to have regard to the factors specified in s 13(4): 1. <span>The intentions of the person(s) who created the trust; 2. The purposes for which the land is held; and 3. The circumstances and wishes of the beneficiaries entitled to occupy the land under s 12.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1354564504844

Tags
#co-ownership #land #law
Question
TLATA 1996, s. 13(3) gives the trustees a power to impose reasonable conditions on the occupying beneficiary/beneficiaries (for example, requiring the beneficiary to pay the outgoings or to carry out repairs). However, in exercising their powers under this section, the trustees are to have regard to the factors specified in TLATA 1996, s. 13(4): 1. The intentions of the person(s) who created the trust; 2. [...]; and 3. The circumstances and wishes of the beneficiaries entitled to occupy the land under TLATA 1996, s. 12.
Answer
The purposes for which the land is held

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ary to pay the outgoings or to carry out repairs). However, in exercising their powers under this section, the trustees are to have regard to the factors specified in s 13(4): 1. The intentions of the person(s) who created the trust; 2. <span>The purposes for which the land is held; and 3. The circumstances and wishes of the beneficiaries entitled to occupy the land under s 12.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1354567650572

Tags
#co-ownership #land #law
Question
TLATA 1996, s. 13(3) gives the trustees a power to impose reasonable conditions on the occupying beneficiary/beneficiaries (for example, requiring the beneficiary to pay the outgoings or to carry out repairs). However, in exercising their powers under this section, the trustees are to have regard to the factors specified in TLATA 1996, s. 13(4): 1. The intentions of the person(s) who created the trust; 2. The purposes for which the land is held; and 3. [...] under TLATA 1996, s. 12.
Answer
The circumstances and wishes of the beneficiaries entitled to occupy the land

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
. However, in exercising their powers under this section, the trustees are to have regard to the factors specified in s 13(4): 1. The intentions of the person(s) who created the trust; 2. The purposes for which the land is held; and 3. <span>The circumstances and wishes of the beneficiaries entitled to occupy the land under s 12.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1354569223436

Tags
#co-ownership #land #law
Question
TLATA 1996, s. 13(3) gives the trustees a power to impose reasonable conditions on the occupying beneficiary/beneficiaries (for example, requiring the beneficiary to pay the outgoings or to carry out repairs). However, in exercising their powers under this section, the trustees are to have regard to the factors specified in TLATA 1996, s. 13(4): 1. The intentions of the person(s) who created the trust; 2. The purposes for which the land is held; and 3. The circumstances and wishes of the beneficiaries entitled to occupy the land under [Statute].
Answer
TLATA 1996, s. 12

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
regard to the factors specified in s 13(4): 1. The intentions of the person(s) who created the trust; 2. The purposes for which the land is held; and 3. The circumstances and wishes of the beneficiaries entitled to occupy the land under <span>s 12.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366088617228

Tags
#conspiracy #crime #inchoate #law
Question
The offence is complete as soon as the parties agree.There is no need for the parties to have taken steps to carry out their agreement: [case].
Answer
DPP v Doot [1973] AC 807

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The offence is complete as soon as the parties agree.There is no need for the parties to have taken steps to carry out their agreement: DPP v Doot [1973] AC 807.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366090976524

Tags
#conspiracy #crime #inchoate #law
Question
The offence is complete [when?] : DPP v Doot [1973] AC 807.
Answer
as soon as the parties agree

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The offence is complete as soon as the parties agree.There is no need for the parties to have taken steps to carry out their agreement: DPP v Doot [1973] AC 807.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366094384396

Tags
#conspiracy #crime #inchoate #law
Question
In [case], the defendant's conviction was quashed because it could not be proved that the parties had gone beyond the stage of negotiations when the defendant withdrew.
Answer
R v Walker [1962] Crim LR 458

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In R v Walker [1962] Crim LR 458, the defendant's conviction was quashed because it could not be proved that the parties had gone beyond the stage of negotiations when the defendant withdrew.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366096743692

Tags
#conspiracy #crime #inchoate #law
Question
In R v Walker [1962] Crim LR 458, the defendant's conviction was quashed because [reasoning].
Answer
it could not be proved that the parties had gone beyond the stage of negotiations when the defendant withdrew

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In R v Walker [1962] Crim LR 458, the defendant's conviction was quashed because it could not be proved that the parties had gone beyond the stage of negotiations when the defendant withdrew.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366099365132

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
Note that the prohibition contained in the CLA 1977, s [...] does not prevent the conviction of a person who conspires with their spouse and others: R v Chrastny [1991] 1 WLR 1381.
Answer
2(2)(a)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Note that the prohibition contained in the CLA 1977, s 2(2)(a) does not prevent the conviction of a person who conspires with their spouse and others: R v Chrastny [1991] 1 WLR 1381.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366100937996

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
Note that the prohibition contained in the CLA [year], s 2(2)(a) does not prevent the conviction of a person who conspires with their spouse and others: R v Chrastny [1991] 1 WLR 1381.
Answer
1977

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Note that the prohibition contained in the CLA 1977, s 2(2)(a) does not prevent the conviction of a person who conspires with their spouse and others: R v Chrastny [1991] 1 WLR 1381.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366103297292

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
Note that the prohibition contained in the [statute] 1977, s 2(2)(a) does not prevent the conviction of a person who conspires with their spouse and others: R v Chrastny [1991] 1 WLR 1381.
Answer
CLA

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Note that the prohibition contained in the CLA 1977, s 2(2)(a) does not prevent the conviction of a person who conspires with their spouse and others: R v Chrastny [1991] 1 WLR 1381.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366105656588

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
Note that the prohibition contained in the [statute] does not prevent the conviction of a person who conspires with their spouse and others: R v Chrastny [1991] 1 WLR 1381.
Answer
CLA 1977, s 2(2)(a)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Note that the prohibition contained in the CLA 1977, s 2(2)(a) does not prevent the conviction of a person who conspires with their spouse and others: R v Chrastny [1991] 1 WLR 1381.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366108015884

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
Note that the prohibition contained in the CLA 1977, s 2(2)(a) does not prevent the conviction of a person who conspires with their spouse and others: [case].
Answer
R v Chrastny [1991] 1 WLR 1381

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Note that the prohibition contained in the CLA 1977, s 2(2)(a) does not prevent the conviction of a person who conspires with their spouse and others: R v Chrastny [1991] 1 WLR 1381.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366113520908

Tags
#conspiracy #crime #inchoate #law
Question
Where the parties agree that they will commit a criminal offence only if certain circumstances occur, this is sufficient to establish both the actus reus and the mens rea of conspiracy: [case].
Answer
R v Jackson [1985] Crim LR 442

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Where the parties agree that they will commit a criminal offence only if certain circumstances occur, this is sufficient to establish both the actus reus and the mens rea of conspiracy: see R v Jackson [1985] Crim LR 442.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366117977356

Tags
#attempt #crime #inchoate #law
Question
The former common law on attempt was replaced by the Criminal Attempts Act [year].
Answer
1981

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The former common law on attempt was replaced by the Criminal Attempts Act 1981 (CAA 1981).

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366120336652

Tags
#attempt #crime #inchoate #law
Question
The former common law on attempt was replaced by the [statute] 1981.
Answer
Criminal Attempts Act

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The former common law on attempt was replaced by the Criminal Attempts Act 1981 (CAA 1981).

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366123482380

Tags
#attempt #crime #inchoate #law
Question
The former common law on attempt was replaced by the [statute].
Answer
Criminal Attempts Act 1981 (CAA 1981)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The former common law on attempt was replaced by the Criminal Attempts Act 1981 (CAA 1981).

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366128463116

Tags
#attempt #crime #inchoate #law
Question
Under the CAA 1981, s [...]:
  1. If, with intent to commit an offence to which this section applies, a person does an act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of an offence, he is guilty of an attempt to commit that offence.
  2. A person may be guilty of an attempt to commit an offence to which this section applies even though the facts are such that the commission of the offence is impossible.
  3. In any case where:
    • (a) apart from this subsection a person's intention would not be regarded as having amounted to an intent to commit an offence; but
    • (b) if the facts of the case had been as he believed them to be, his intention would be so regarded. then, for the purposes of subsection (1) above, he shall be regarded as having had an intent to commit that offence.'
Answer
1

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Under the CAA 1981, s 1: If, with intent to commit an offence to which this section applies, a person does an act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of an offence, he is guilty of a

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366130035980

Tags
#attempt #crime #inchoate #law
Question
Under the [statute]:
  1. If, with intent to commit an offence to which this section applies, a person does an act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of an offence, he is guilty of an attempt to commit that offence.
  2. A person may be guilty of an attempt to commit an offence to which this section applies even though the facts are such that the commission of the offence is impossible.
  3. In any case where:
    • (a) apart from this subsection a person's intention would not be regarded as having amounted to an intent to commit an offence; but
    • (b) if the facts of the case had been as he believed them to be, his intention would be so regarded. then, for the purposes of subsection (1) above, he shall be regarded as having had an intent to commit that offence.'
Answer
CAA 1981, s 1

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Under the CAA 1981, s 1: If, with intent to commit an offence to which this section applies, a person does an act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of an offence, he is guilty of a

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366132395276

Tags
#attempt #crime #inchoate #law
Question
Under the CAA 1981, s 1:
  1. If, with intent to commit an offence to which this section applies, a person does an act which is [...], he is guilty of an attempt to commit that offence.
  2. A person may be guilty of an attempt to commit an offence to which this section applies even though the facts are such that the commission of the offence is impossible.
  3. In any case where:
    • (a) apart from this subsection a person's intention would not be regarded as having amounted to an intent to commit an offence; but
    • (b) if the facts of the case had been as he believed them to be, his intention would be so regarded. then, for the purposes of subsection (1) above, he shall be regarded as having had an intent to commit that offence.'
Answer
more than merely preparatory to the commission of an offence

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Under the CAA 1981, s 1: If, with intent to commit an offence to which this section applies, a person does an act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of an offence, he is guilty of an attempt to commit that offence. A person may be guilty of an attempt to commit an offence to which this section applies even though the facts are such that the commi

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366133968140

Tags
#attempt #crime #inchoate #law
Question
Under the CAA 1981, s 1:
  1. If, with intent to commit an offence to which this section applies, a person does an act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of an offence, he is guilty of an attempt to commit that offence.
  2. A person may be guilty of an attempt to commit an offence to which this section applies even though the facts are such that [...].
  3. In any case where:
    • (a) apart from this subsection a person's intention would not be regarded as having amounted to an intent to commit an offence; but
    • (b) if the facts of the case had been as he believed them to be, his intention would be so regarded. then, for the purposes of subsection (1) above, he shall be regarded as having had an intent to commit that offence.'
Answer
the commission of the offence is impossible

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ch is more than merely preparatory to the commission of an offence, he is guilty of an attempt to commit that offence. A person may be guilty of an attempt to commit an offence to which this section applies even though the facts are such that <span>the commission of the offence is impossible. In any case where: (a) apart from this subsection a person's intention would not be regarded as having amounted to an intent to commit an offence; but (b) if the facts of the c

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366136589580

Tags
#attempt #crime #inchoate #law
Question
If, with intent to commit an offence to which this section applies, a person does an act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of an offence, he is guilty of an attempt to commit that offence. (CAA 1981, s [...])
Answer
1(1)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
1981, s 1: If, with intent to commit an offence to which this section applies, a person does an act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of an offence, he is guilty of an attempt to commit that offence. (CAA 1981, s <span>1(1)) A person may be guilty of an attempt to commit an offence to which this section applies even though the facts are such that the commission of the offence is impossible. (CAA 1981, s 1(

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366139997452

Tags
#attempt #crime #inchoate #law
Question
If, with intent to commit an offence to which this section applies, a person does an act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of an offence, he is guilty of an attempt to commit that offence. (CAA 1981, s [...]
Answer
1(1)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
>If, with intent to commit an offence to which this section applies, a person does an act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of an offence, he is guilty of an attempt to commit that offence. (CAA 1981, s 1(1))<html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366141570316

Tags
#attempt #crime #inchoate #law
Question
If, with intent to commit an offence to which this section applies, a person does an act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of an offence, he is guilty of an attempt to commit that offence. (CAA [year], s 1(1))
Answer
1981

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
d><head>If, with intent to commit an offence to which this section applies, a person does an act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of an offence, he is guilty of an attempt to commit that offence. (CAA 1981, s 1(1))<html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366143929612

Tags
#attempt #crime #inchoate #law
Question
If, with intent to commit an offence to which this section applies, a person does an act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of an offence, he is guilty of an attempt to commit that offence. ([statute] 1981, s 1(1))
Answer
CAA

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
If, with intent to commit an offence to which this section applies, a person does an act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of an offence, he is guilty of an attempt to commit that offence. (CAA 1981, s 1(1))<html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366146551052

Tags
#attempt #crime #inchoate #law
Question
If, with intent to commit an offence to which this section applies, a person does an act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of an offence, he is guilty of an attempt to commit that offence. ([statute]
Answer
CAA 1981, s 1(1)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
If, with intent to commit an offence to which this section applies, a person does an act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of an offence, he is guilty of an attempt to commit that offence. (CAA 1981, s 1(1))<html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366148910348

Tags
#attempt #crime #inchoate #law
Question
If, with intent to commit an offence to which this section applies, a person does an act which is [...] to the commission of an offence, he is guilty of an attempt to commit that offence. (CAA 1981, s 1(1))
Answer
more than merely preparatory

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
If, with intent to commit an offence to which this section applies, a person does an act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of an offence, he is guilty of an attempt to commit that offence. (CAA 1981, s 1(1))

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366150483212

Tags
#attempt #crime #inchoate #law
Question
If, with intent to commit an offence to which this section applies, a person does an act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of an offence, he is guilty of an [...] that offence. (CAA 1981, s 1(1))
Answer
attempt to commit

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
If, with intent to commit an offence to which this section applies, a person does an act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of an offence, he is guilty of an attempt to commit that offence. (CAA 1981, s 1(1))

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366153104652

Tags
#attempt #crime #inchoate #law
Question
A person may be guilty of an attempt to commit an offence to which this section applies even though the facts are such that the commission of the offence is impossible. (CAA 1981, s [...])
Answer
1(2)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
A person may be guilty of an attempt to commit an offence to which this section applies even though the facts are such that the commission of the offence is impossible. (CAA 1981, s 1(2))

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366154677516

Tags
#attempt #crime #inchoate #law
Question
A person may be guilty of an attempt to commit an offence to which this section applies even though the facts are such that the commission of the offence is impossible. ([statute], s 1(2))
Answer
CAA 1981

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
A person may be guilty of an attempt to commit an offence to which this section applies even though the facts are such that the commission of the offence is impossible. (CAA 1981, s 1(2))

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366157036812

Tags
#attempt #crime #inchoate #law
Question
A person may be guilty of an attempt to commit an offence to which this section applies even though the facts are such that the commission of the offence is impossible. ([statute])
Answer
CAA 1981, s 1(2)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
A person may be guilty of an attempt to commit an offence to which this section applies even though the facts are such that the commission of the offence is impossible. (CAA 1981, s 1(2))

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366159396108

Tags
#attempt #crime #inchoate #law
Question
A person may be guilty of an attempt to commit an offence to which this section applies even though the facts are such that [...]. (CAA 1981, s 1(2))
Answer
the commission of the offence is impossible

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
A person may be guilty of an attempt to commit an offence to which this section applies even though the facts are such that the commission of the offence is impossible. (CAA 1981, s 1(2))

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366162803980

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
R v Walker & Hayles
Answer
FACTS: This case was on attempted murder. The appellants threw the victim from a third floor balcony. HELD: The court held that the jury may (but do not necessarily have to) infer intention where they are satisfied that the defendant foresaw the result as a virtual certainly.

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
R v Walker & Hayles FACTS: This case was on attempted murder. The appellants threw the victim from a third floor balcony. HELD: The court held that the jury may (but do not necessarily have to) infer inten

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366165163276

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
R v Walker & Hayles FACTS: This case was on attempted murder. The appellants threw the victim from a third floor balcony. HELD: The court held that the jury may (but do not necessarily have to) infer intention where [circumstance].
Answer
they are satisfied that the defendant foresaw the result as a virtual certainly

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
>R v Walker & Hayles FACTS: This case was on attempted murder. The appellants threw the victim from a third floor balcony. HELD: The court held that the jury may (but do not necessarily have to) infer intention where they are satisfied that the defendant foresaw the result as a virtual certainly.<html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366169095436

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
R v Taafe [1983] 2 ALL 625.
Answer
FACTS; Taffe was caught importing illegal drugs into the United Kingdom. He thought the bag containing the drugs contained currency and he mistakenly that it was an offence to import this currency into the UK. HELD: Taffe could not be convicted of an attempt to import currency into the UK, because there is no such offence.

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
R v Taafe [1983] 2 ALL 625. FACTS; Taffe was caught importing illegal drugs into the United Kingdom. He thought the bag containing the drugs contained currency and he mistakenly that it was an offence to import thi

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366171454732

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
R v Taafe [1983] 2 ALL 625. FACTS; Taffe was caught importing illegal drugs into the United Kingdom. He thought the bag containing the drugs contained currency and he mistakenly that it was an offence to import this currency into the UK. HELD: Taffe could not be convicted of an attempt to import currency into the UK, because [why?].
Answer
there is no such offence

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
United Kingdom. He thought the bag containing the drugs contained currency and he mistakenly that it was an offence to import this currency into the UK. HELD: Taffe could not be convicted of an attempt to import currency into the UK, because <span>there is no such offence.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366176959756

Tags
#attempt #crime #inchoate #law
Question
Non-existent crime: This arises where the accused believes that what he is doing is an offence, whereas it is in fact lawful. You cannot turn a lawful act into an unlawful act. Therefore a prosecutor, seeking to convict a defendant of an offence, relying on the defendant's intent to do something else which is not in itself a crime, will not succeed: [case].
Answer
R v Taafe [1983] 2 ALL 625

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
in fact lawful. You cannot turn a lawful act into an unlawful act. Therefore a prosecutor, seeking to convict a defendant of an offence, relying on the defendant's intent to do something else which is not in itself a crime, will not succeed: <span>R v Taafe [1983] 2 ALL 625.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366179581196

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
The Criminal Law Act 1977, s [...] (in relation to statutory conspiracy) and the Criminal Attempts Act 1981, s 1(2) & (3) (in relation to statutory attempt) have reversed the common law position on impossibility in fact. This is now no longer a defence to attempt or conspiracy. So, for example, if X and Y agree that Y will stab V. Y stabs V, but V is already dead, then X and Y will be guilty of conspiracy to murder and Y will be guilty of attempted murder. This is illustrated for attempt in the House of Lords case of R v Shivpuri.
Answer
1(1)(b)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The Criminal Law Act 1977, s 1(1)(b) (in relation to statutory conspiracy) and the Criminal Attempts Act 1981, s 1(2) & (3) (in relation to statutory attempt) have reversed the common law position on impossibility in

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366181154060

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
The Criminal Law Act 1977, s 1(1)(b) (in relation to statutory conspiracy) and the Criminal Attempts Act 1981, s [...] (in relation to statutory attempt) have reversed the common law position on impossibility in fact. This is now no longer a defence to attempt or conspiracy. So, for example, if X and Y agree that Y will stab V. Y stabs V, but V is already dead, then X and Y will be guilty of conspiracy to murder and Y will be guilty of attempted murder. This is illustrated for attempt in the House of Lords case of R v Shivpuri.
Answer
1(2) & (3)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The Criminal Law Act 1977, s 1(1)(b) (in relation to statutory conspiracy) and the Criminal Attempts Act 1981, s 1(2) & (3) (in relation to statutory attempt) have reversed the common law position on impossibility in fact. This is now no longer a defence to attempt or conspiracy. So, for example, if X and Y

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366182726924

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
The [statute], s 1(1)(b) (in relation to statutory conspiracy) and the Criminal Attempts Act 1981, s 1(2) & (3) (in relation to statutory attempt) have reversed the common law position on impossibility in fact. This is now no longer a defence to attempt or conspiracy. So, for example, if X and Y agree that Y will stab V. Y stabs V, but V is already dead, then X and Y will be guilty of conspiracy to murder and Y will be guilty of attempted murder. This is illustrated for attempt in the House of Lords case of R v Shivpuri.
Answer
Criminal Law Act 1977

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The Criminal Law Act 1977, s 1(1)(b) (in relation to statutory conspiracy) and the Criminal Attempts Act 1981, s 1(2) & (3) (in relation to statutory attempt) have reversed the common law position on impos

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366184299788

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
The Criminal Law Act 1977, s 1(1)(b) (in relation to statutory conspiracy) and the [statute], s 1(2) & (3) (in relation to statutory attempt) have reversed the common law position on impossibility in fact. This is now no longer a defence to attempt or conspiracy. So, for example, if X and Y agree that Y will stab V. Y stabs V, but V is already dead, then X and Y will be guilty of conspiracy to murder and Y will be guilty of attempted murder. This is illustrated for attempt in the House of Lords case of R v Shivpuri.
Answer
Criminal Attempts Act 1981

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The Criminal Law Act 1977, s 1(1)(b) (in relation to statutory conspiracy) and the Criminal Attempts Act 1981, s 1(2) & (3) (in relation to statutory attempt) have reversed the common law position on impossibility in fact. This is now no longer a defence to attempt or conspiracy. So, for

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366185872652

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
The [statute] (in relation to statutory conspiracy) and the Criminal Attempts Act 1981, s 1(2) & (3) (in relation to statutory attempt) have reversed the common law position on impossibility in fact. This is now no longer a defence to attempt or conspiracy. So, for example, if X and Y agree that Y will stab V. Y stabs V, but V is already dead, then X and Y will be guilty of conspiracy to murder and Y will be guilty of attempted murder. This is illustrated for attempt in the House of Lords case of R v Shivpuri.
Answer
Criminal Law Act 1977, s 1(1)(b)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The Criminal Law Act 1977, s 1(1)(b) (in relation to statutory conspiracy) and the Criminal Attempts Act 1981, s 1(2) & (3) (in relation to statutory attempt) have reversed the common law position on impossibility in

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366188231948

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
The Criminal Law Act 1977, s 1(1)(b) (in relation to statutory conspiracy) and the [statute] (in relation to statutory attempt) have reversed the common law position on impossibility in fact. This is now no longer a defence to attempt or conspiracy. So, for example, if X and Y agree that Y will stab V. Y stabs V, but V is already dead, then X and Y will be guilty of conspiracy to murder and Y will be guilty of attempted murder. This is illustrated for attempt in the House of Lords case of R v Shivpuri.
Answer
Criminal Attempts Act 1981, s 1(2) & (3)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The Criminal Law Act 1977, s 1(1)(b) (in relation to statutory conspiracy) and the Criminal Attempts Act 1981, s 1(2) & (3) (in relation to statutory attempt) have reversed the common law position on impossibility in fact. This is now no longer a defence to attempt or conspiracy. So, for example, if X and Y

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366192426252

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
The Criminal Law Act 1977, s 1(1)(b) (in relation to statutory conspiracy) and the Criminal Attempts Act 1981, s 1(2) & (3) (in relation to statutory attempt) have [...]
Answer
reversed the common law position on impossibility in fact. This is now no longer a defence to attempt or conspiracy.

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The Criminal Law Act 1977, s 1(1)(b) (in relation to statutory conspiracy) and the Criminal Attempts Act 1981, s 1(2) & (3) (in relation to statutory attempt) have reversed the common law position on impossibility in fact. This is now no longer a defence to attempt or conspiracy. So, for example, if X and Y agree that Y will stab V. Y stabs V, but V is already dead, then X and Y will be guilty of conspiracy to murder and Y will be guilty of attempted murder.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366194785548

Tags
#crime #inchoate #law
Question
The Criminal Law Act 1977, s 1(1)(b) (in relation to statutory conspiracy) and the Criminal Attempts Act 1981, s 1(2) & (3) (in relation to statutory attempt) have reversed the common law position on impossibility in fact. This is now no longer a defence to attempt or conspiracy. So, for example, if X and Y agree that Y will stab V. Y stabs V, but V is already dead, then X and Y will be guilty of conspiracy to murder and Y will be guilty of attempted murder. This is illustrated for attempt in the House of Lords case of [case].
Answer
R v Shivpuri

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
example, if X and Y agree that Y will stab V. Y stabs V, but V is already dead, then X and Y will be guilty of conspiracy to murder and Y will be guilty of attempted murder. This is illustrated for attempt in the House of Lords case of <span>R v Shivpuri.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366197406988

Tags
#crime #law #mr
Question
In [case], the distinction between gross negligence and civil negligence was described:

'… in order to establish criminal liability the facts must be such that, in the opinion of the jury, the negligence of the accused went beyond a mere matter of compensation between subjects and showed such disregard for the life and safety of others as to amount to a crime against the state and conduct deserving punishment.'

Answer
R v Bateman (1925) 19 Cr App R 8 (CCA)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In R v Bateman (1925) 19 Cr App R 8 (CCA), the distinction between gross negligence and civil negligence was described: '… in order to establish criminal liability the facts must be such that, in the opinion of the

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366199766284

Tags
#crime #law #mr
Question
In R v Bateman (1925) 19 Cr App R 8 (CCA), the distinction between gross negligence and civil negligence was described:

'… in order to establish criminal liability the facts must be such that, [...], the negligence of the accused went beyond a mere matter of compensation between subjects and showed such disregard for the life and safety of others as to amount to a crime against the state and conduct deserving punishment.'

Answer
in the opinion of the jury

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In R v Bateman (1925) 19 Cr App R 8 (CCA), the distinction between gross negligence and civil negligence was described: '… in order to establish criminal liability the facts must be such that, in the opinion of the jury, the negligence of the accused went beyond a mere matter of compensation between subjects and showed such disregard for the life and safety of others as to amount to a crime against the

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366201339148

Tags
#crime #law #mr
Question
In R v Bateman (1925) 19 Cr App R 8 (CCA), the distinction between gross negligence and civil negligence was described:

'… in order to establish criminal liability the facts must be such that, in the opinion of the jury, the negligence of the accused went [...].'

Answer
beyond a mere matter of compensation between subjects and showed such disregard for the life and safety of others as to amount to a crime against the state and conduct deserving punishment

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
r App R 8 (CCA), the distinction between gross negligence and civil negligence was described: '… in order to establish criminal liability the facts must be such that, in the opinion of the jury, the negligence of the accused went <span>beyond a mere matter of compensation between subjects and showed such disregard for the life and safety of others as to amount to a crime against the state and conduct deserving punishment.' <span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366204222732

Tags
#crime #law #mr
Question
R v Gnango [2011] 1 WLR 1414
Answer
The defendant (D) had engaged in a public gunfight with his opponent (X) and an innocent passer-by (V) was killed. Although the appeal case focused on issues of joint enterprise (which is not studied on this module), the case confirmed that X was guilty of the death of V, following the established principles of transferred malice. X had intended to kill D and his intention was simply transferred over to V.

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
A more recent case dealing with the issue of transferred malice is that of R v Gnango [2011] 1 WLR 1414. The defendant (D) had engaged in a public gunfight with his opponent (X) and an innocent passer-by (V) was killed. Although the appeal case focused on issues of joint enterprise (which

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366206844172

Tags
#crime #law #mr
Question
Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [1969] 1QB 439
Answer
FACTS: Fagan accidentally drove onto a policeman's foot. The policeman asked him to move off his foot, but Fagan put the handbrake on and refused to do so. He was charged with assaulting a police officer in the execution of his duty. At the time of driving onto the foot, which was the actus reus of the crime, he did not have the mens rea. HELD: However, the Divisional Court held that the assault involved a battery (see section.6.2) and this battery continued after the car came to rest. The actus reus was a continuing act, and it was enough that Fagan had the mens rea at some time during its continuance.

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [1969] 1QB 439 FACTS: Fagan accidentally drove onto a policeman's foot. The policeman asked him to move off his foot, but Fagan put the handbrake on and refused to do so. He was charged with assaulti

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366209203468

Tags
#crime #law #mr
Question
Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [1969] 1QB 439 FACTS: Fagan accidentally drove onto a policeman's foot. The policeman asked him to move off his foot, but Fagan put the handbrake on and refused to do so. He was charged with assaulting a police officer in the execution of his duty. At the time of driving onto the foot, which was the actus reus of the crime, he did not have the mens rea. HELD: However, the Divisional Court held that the assault involved a battery (see section.6.2) and this battery continued after the car came to rest. The actus reus was a [...], and it was enough that Fagan had the mens rea at some time during its continuance.
Answer
continuing act

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
which was the actus reus of the crime, he did not have the mens rea. HELD: However, the Divisional Court held that the assault involved a battery (see section.6.2) and this battery continued after the car came to rest. The actus reus was a <span>continuing act, and it was enough that Fagan had the mens rea at some time during its continuance. <span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366210776332

Tags
#crime #law #mr
Question
Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [1969] 1QB 439 FACTS: Fagan accidentally drove onto a policeman's foot. The policeman asked him to move off his foot, but Fagan put the handbrake on and refused to do so. He was charged with assaulting a police officer in the execution of his duty. At the time of driving onto the foot, which was the actus reus of the crime, he did not have the mens rea. HELD: However, the Divisional Court held that the assault involved a battery (see section.6.2) and this battery continued after the car came to rest. The actus reus was a continuing act, and it was enough that Fagan had the mens rea [...].
Answer
at some time during its continuance

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
s rea. HELD: However, the Divisional Court held that the assault involved a battery (see section.6.2) and this battery continued after the car came to rest. The actus reus was a continuing act, and it was enough that Fagan had the mens rea <span>at some time during its continuance. <span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366212611340

Tags
#crime #law #mr
Question
R v Le Brun [1992] QB 61
Answer
D assaulted his wife, hitting her on the jaw and knocking her unconscious. He then attempted to drag her home, and in doing so he accidentally dropped her and she fractured her skull on the pavement. She died from the fracture to the skull. D was convicted of manslaughter and the conviction was upheld. The court said that the unlawful act and the act causing death were all part of the 'same transaction'. Lord Lane stated that it did not matter that there was no preconceived plan and that the defendant knew that his wife was still alive. He said that the transaction continued as long as the defendant was trying to cover up the crime he believed he had committed.

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In R v Le Brun [1992] QB 61, D assaulted his wife, hitting her on the jaw and knocking her unconscious. He then attempted to drag her home, and in doing so he accidentally dropped her and she fractured her skull

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366214970636

Tags
#crime #law #mr
Question
In R v Le Brun [1992] QB 61, D assaulted his wife, hitting her on the jaw and knocking her unconscious. He then attempted to drag her home, and in doing so he accidentally dropped her and she fractured her skull on the pavement. She died from the fracture to the skull. D was convicted of manslaughter and the conviction was upheld. The court said that [...]. Lord Lane stated that it did not matter that there was no preconceived plan and that the defendant knew that his wife was still alive. He said that the transaction continued as long as the defendant was trying to cover up the crime he believed he had committed.
Answer
the unlawful act and the act causing death were all part of the 'same transaction'

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
attempted to drag her home, and in doing so he accidentally dropped her and she fractured her skull on the pavement. She died from the fracture to the skull. D was convicted of manslaughter and the conviction was upheld. The court said that <span>the unlawful act and the act causing death were all part of the 'same transaction'. Lord Lane stated that it did not matter that there was no preconceived plan and that the defendant knew that his wife was still alive. He said that the transaction continued as long

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366216543500

Tags
#crime #law #mr
Question
In R v Le Brun [1992] QB 61, D assaulted his wife, hitting her on the jaw and knocking her unconscious. He then attempted to drag her home, and in doing so he accidentally dropped her and she fractured her skull on the pavement. She died from the fracture to the skull. D was convicted of manslaughter and the conviction was upheld. The court said that the unlawful act and the act causing death were all part of the 'same transaction'. Lord Lane stated that it did not matter that there was no preconceived plan and that the defendant knew that his wife was still alive. He said that the transaction continued [...].
Answer
as long as the defendant was trying to cover up the crime he believed he had committed

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
and the act causing death were all part of the 'same transaction'. Lord Lane stated that it did not matter that there was no preconceived plan and that the defendant knew that his wife was still alive. He said that the transaction continued <span>as long as the defendant was trying to cover up the crime he believed he had committed.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366218116364

Tags
#crime #law #mr
Question
In R v Le Brun [1992] QB 61, D assaulted his wife, hitting her on the jaw and knocking her unconscious. He then attempted to drag her home, and in doing so he accidentally dropped her and she fractured her skull on the pavement. She died from the fracture to the skull. D was convicted of manslaughter and the conviction was upheld. The court said that the unlawful act and the act causing death were all part of the 'same transaction'. [Who?] stated that it did not matter that there was no preconceived plan and that the defendant knew that his wife was still alive. He said that the transaction continued as long as the defendant was trying to cover up the crime he believed he had committed.
Answer
Lord Lane

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
tured her skull on the pavement. She died from the fracture to the skull. D was convicted of manslaughter and the conviction was upheld. The court said that the unlawful act and the act causing death were all part of the 'same transaction'. <span>Lord Lane stated that it did not matter that there was no preconceived plan and that the defendant knew that his wife was still alive. He said that the transaction continued as long as the defen

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366220737804

Tags
#crime #law #mr
Question
If the defendant does not know he is breaking the law, his mistake will not help him avoid liability. Hence, the saying 'Ignorance of the law is no excuse'. This is the case even if D's ignorance is quite reasonable, and even if it were impossible for him to know of the prohibition in question. In [case] D was convicted of an offence created by a statute when he was on the high seas. He committed it before the end of his voyage when he could not possibly have known of the statute.
Answer
R v Bailey (1800) Russ & Ry 1

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
mistake will not help him avoid liability. Hence, the saying 'Ignorance of the law is no excuse'. This is the case even if D's ignorance is quite reasonable, and even if it were impossible for him to know of the prohibition in question. In <span>R v Bailey (1800) Russ & Ry 1 D was convicted of an offence created by a statute when he was on the high seas. He committed it before the end of his voyage when he could not possibly have known of the statute.</spa

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366223621388

Tags
#crime #law #omissions
Question
There is no general duty to act to prevent harm – [case]
Answer
R v Smith (William) (1826) 2 C&P 449

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
There is no general duty to act to prevent harm – R v Smith (William) (1826) 2 C&P 449

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366226242828

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
Whether property is damaged is a question of fact and degree. In [case], the court considered that it was difficult to lay down a general rule as to what constitutes damage. It held that it must be guided by the circumstances of each case, the nature of the article, and the mode by which it was affected. The court stated:

'[T]he word … is sufficiently wide in its meaning to embrace injury, mischief or harm done to property, and that in order to constitute damage it is unnecessary to establish such definite or actual damage as renders the property useless or prevents it from serving its normal function …'

Answer
Samuels v Stubbs [1972] 4 SASR 200

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Whether property is damaged is a question of fact and degree. In Samuels v Stubbs [1972] 4 SASR 200, the court considered that it was difficult to lay down a general rule as to what constitutes damage. It held that it must be guided by the circumstances of each case, the nature of the

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366228602124

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
Whether property is damaged is a question of fact and degree.
Answer
Samuels v Stubbs

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Whether property is damaged is a question of fact and degree. In Samuels v Stubbs [1972] 4 SASR 200, the court considered that it was difficult to lay down a general rule as to what constitutes damage. It held that it must be guided by the circumst

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366230961420

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
Whether property is damaged is a question of fact and degree. In Samuels v Stubbs [1972] 4 SASR 200, the court considered that it was difficult to lay down a general rule as to what constitutes damage. It held that it must be guided by the circumstances of each case, the nature of the article, and the mode by which it was affected. The court stated:

'[T]he word … is sufficiently wide in its meaning to embrace injury, mischief or harm done to property, and that in order to constitute damage it is unnecessary to establish such definite or actual damage as [...] …'

Answer
renders the property useless or prevents it from serving its normal function

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ed. The court stated: '[T]he word … is sufficiently wide in its meaning to embrace injury, mischief or harm done to property, and that in order to constitute damage it is unnecessary to establish such definite or actual damage as <span>renders the property useless or prevents it from serving its normal function …' <span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366232534284

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
Whether property is damaged is a question of fact and degree. In Samuels v Stubbs [1972] 4 SASR 200, the court considered that it was difficult to lay down a general rule as to what constitutes damage. It held that it must be guided by the circumstances of each case, the nature of the article, and the mode by which it was affected. The court stated:

'[T]he word … is sufficiently wide in its meaning to embrace injury, mischief or harm done to property, and that in order to constitute damage [...] …'

Answer
it is unnecessary to establish such definite or actual damage as renders the property useless or prevents it from serving its normal function

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
e, the nature of the article, and the mode by which it was affected. The court stated: '[T]he word … is sufficiently wide in its meaning to embrace injury, mischief or harm done to property, and that in order to constitute damage <span>it is unnecessary to establish such definite or actual damage as renders the property useless or prevents it from serving its normal function …' <span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366234369292

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
In [case], the court held that spitting on a policeman's coat was not criminal damage. This decision seems to imply that there has to be some expense on the part of the owner to restore the property to its previous condition.
Answer
A (a juvenile) v R [1978] Crim LR 689

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In A (a juvenile) v R [1978] Crim LR 689, the court held that spitting on a policeman's coat was not criminal damage. This decision seems to imply that there has to be some expense on the part of the owner to restore the pro

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366236728588

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
In A (a juvenile) v R [1978] Crim LR 689, the court held that spitting on a policeman's coat was not criminal damage. This decision seems to imply that [...].
Answer
there has to be some expense on the part of the owner to restore the property to its previous condition

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In A (a juvenile) v R [1978] Crim LR 689, the court held that spitting on a policeman's coat was not criminal damage. This decision seems to imply that there has to be some expense on the part of the owner to restore the property to its previous condition.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366238563596

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
Without Lawful Excuse This element is dealt with in the CDA 1971, ss. [...].
Answer
5(2) and (3)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Without Lawful Excuse This element is dealt with in the CDA 1971, s 5(2) and (3).

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366240922892

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
Without Lawful Excuse This element is dealt with in the [statute], s 5(2) and (3).
Answer
CDA 1971

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Without Lawful Excuse This element is dealt with in the CDA 1971, s 5(2) and (3).

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366242495756

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
Without Lawful Excuse This element is dealt with in the [statute].
Answer
CDA 1971, s 5(2) and (3)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Without Lawful Excuse This element is dealt with in the CDA 1971, s 5(2) and (3).

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366246165772

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
The CDA 1971, s [...] operates where the defendant believes that the owner would have consented to the damage.
Answer
5(2)(a)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The CDA 1971, s 5(2)(a) operates where the defendant believes that the owner would have consented to the damage.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366247738636

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
The CDA 1971, s 5(2)(a) operates where [...].
Answer
the defendant believes that the owner would have consented to the damage

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The CDA 1971, s 5(2)(a) operates where the defendant believes that the owner would have consented to the damage.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366249573644

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
R v Denton [1982] 1 All ER 65
Answer
FACTS: The owner of a factory in financial difficulties had apparently said to D: 'There is nothing like a good fire for improving the financial circumstances of a business'. D took this as an instruction to set fire to the factory, which he did. HELD: His conviction for arson was quashed, the Court of Appeal holding that he was entitled to the CDA 1971, s 5(2)(a) defence.

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
R v Denton [1982] 1 All ER 65 FACTS: The owner of a factory in financial difficulties had apparently said to D: 'There is nothing like a good fire for improving the financial circumstances of a business'. D took th

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366252195084

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
There are four requirements for the s5(2)(b) defence.
(a) The defendant must act [...].
(b) s5(2(b)(i) The accused must believe that the property was in immediate need of protection (subjective test).
(c) s5(2)(b)(ii) The accused must believe that the means of protection adopted are reasonable.
(d) The damage caused by the accused must be (objectively) capable of protecting the property.
Answer
to protect property

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
There are four requirements for the s5(2)(b) defence. (a) The defendant must act to protect property. (b) s5(2(b)(i) The accused must believe that the property was in immediate need of protection (subjective test). (c) s5(2)(b)(ii) The accused must believe that the means of p

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366253767948

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
There are four requirements for the s5(2)(b) defence.
(a) The defendant must act to protect property.
(b) s[...] The accused must believe that the property was in immediate need of protection (subjective test).
(c) s5(2)(b)(ii) The accused must believe that the means of protection adopted are reasonable.
(d) The damage caused by the accused must be (objectively) capable of protecting the property.
Answer
5(2)(b)(i)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
There are four requirements for the s5(2)(b) defence. (a) The defendant must act to protect property. (b) s5(2(b)(i) The accused must believe that the property was in immediate need of protection (subjective test). (c) s5(2)(b)(ii) The accused must believe that the means of protection adopted are

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366256127244

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
There are four requirements for the s5(2)(b) defence.
(a) The defendant must act to protect property.
(b) s5(2(b)(i) The accused must [...] (subjective test).
(c) s5(2)(b)(ii) The accused must believe that the means of protection adopted are reasonable.
(d) The damage caused by the accused must be (objectively) capable of protecting the property.
Answer
believe that the property was in immediate need of protection

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
There are four requirements for the s5(2)(b) defence. (a) The defendant must act to protect property. (b) s5(2(b)(i) The accused must believe that the property was in immediate need of protection (subjective test). (c) s5(2)(b)(ii) The accused must believe that the means of protection adopted are reasonable. (d) The damage caused by the accused must be (objectively) cap

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366257700108

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
There are four requirements for the s5(2)(b) defence.
(a) The defendant must act to protect property.
(b) s5(2(b)(i) The accused must believe that the property was in immediate need of protection (subjective test).
(c) s[...] The accused must believe that the means of protection adopted are reasonable.
(d) The damage caused by the accused must be (objectively) capable of protecting the property.
Answer
5(2)(b)(ii)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
n>There are four requirements for the s5(2)(b) defence. (a) The defendant must act to protect property. (b) s5(2(b)(i) The accused must believe that the property was in immediate need of protection (subjective test). (c) s5(2)(b)(ii) The accused must believe that the means of protection adopted are reasonable. (d) The damage caused by the accused must be (objectively) capable of protecting the property.</

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366259272972

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
There are four requirements for the s5(2)(b) defence.
(a) The defendant must act to protect property.
(b) s5(2(b)(i) The accused must believe that the property was in immediate need of protection (subjective test).
(c) s5(2)(b)(ii) The accused must [...].
(d) The damage caused by the accused must be (objectively) capable of protecting the property.
Answer
believe that the means of protection adopted are reasonable

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ements for the s5(2)(b) defence. (a) The defendant must act to protect property. (b) s5(2(b)(i) The accused must believe that the property was in immediate need of protection (subjective test). (c) s5(2)(b)(ii) The accused must <span>believe that the means of protection adopted are reasonable. (d) The damage caused by the accused must be (objectively) capable of protecting the property.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366260845836

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
There are four requirements for the s5(2)(b) defence.
(a) The defendant must act to protect property.
(b) s5(2(b)(i) The accused must believe that the property was in immediate need of protection (subjective test).
(c) s5(2)(b)(ii) The accused must believe that the means of protection adopted are reasonable.
(d) The damage caused by the accused must be [...].
Answer
(objectively) capable of protecting the property

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ccused must believe that the property was in immediate need of protection (subjective test). (c) s5(2)(b)(ii) The accused must believe that the means of protection adopted are reasonable. (d) The damage caused by the accused must be <span>(objectively) capable of protecting the property.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366262680844

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
In [Case] the defendant put forward the additional argument that he was entitled to rely on the CDA 1971, s 5(2)(b) because he had acted to protect property in the Gulf States. Applying the objective test from Hunt, the court held that his actions were not capable of having this effect.
Answer
Blake v DPP

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Blake v DPP (discussed above) the defendant put forward the additional argument that he was entitled to rely on the CDA 1971, s 5(2)(b) because he had acted to protect property in the Gulf States.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366265040140

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
Blake v DPP
Answer
the defendant put forward the additional argument that he was entitled to rely on the CDA 1971, s 5(2)(b) because he had acted to protect property in the Gulf States. Applying the objective test from Hunt, the court held that his actions were not capable of having this effect.

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Blake v DPP (discussed above) the defendant put forward the additional argument that he was entitled to rely on the CDA 1971, s 5(2)(b) because he had acted to protect property in the Gulf States.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366267399436

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
In Blake v DPP (discussed above) the defendant put forward the additional argument that he was entitled to rely on the CDA 1971, s [...] because he had acted to protect property in the Gulf States. Applying the objective test from Hunt, the court held that his actions were not capable of having this effect.
Answer
5(2)(b)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Blake v DPP (discussed above) the defendant put forward the additional argument that he was entitled to rely on the CDA 1971, s 5(2)(b) because he had acted to protect property in the Gulf States. Applying the objective test from Hunt, the court held that his actions were not capable of having this effect. </spa

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366268972300

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
In Blake v DPP (discussed above) the defendant put forward the additional argument that he was entitled to rely on the CDA 1971, s 5(2)(b) because he had acted to protect property in the Gulf States. Applying the objective test from Hunt, the court held that [...].
Answer
his actions were not capable of having this effect

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
scussed above) the defendant put forward the additional argument that he was entitled to rely on the CDA 1971, s 5(2)(b) because he had acted to protect property in the Gulf States. Applying the objective test from Hunt, the court held that <span>his actions were not capable of having this effect. <span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366270807308

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
R v Hill and Hall (1998) 89 Cr App R 74
Answer
The accused, a nuclear protestor, was arrested outside a nuclear submarine base. She was in possession of a hacksaw blade, which she intended to use to cut through the wire. She was charged under the CDA 1971, s 3 and unsuccessfully raised the defence under the CDA 1971, s 5(2)(b) that she was acting in order to persuade the Americans to leave the base, to reduce the threat of a nuclear strike, and thus protect her property. The court held that cutting the wire was far too remote from the eventual aim of protecting property to satisfy the test.

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The objective test was confirmed again in R v Hill and Hall (1998) 89 Cr App R 74. In that case, the accused, a nuclear protestor, was arrested outside a nuclear submarine base. She was in possession of a hacksaw blade, which she intended to use to cut through the

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366273166604

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
The objective test was confirmed again in R v Hill and Hall (1998) 89 Cr App R 74. In that case, the accused, a nuclear protestor, was arrested outside a nuclear submarine base. She was in possession of a hacksaw blade, which she intended to use to cut through the wire. She was charged under the CDA 1971, s [...] and unsuccessfully raised the defence under the CDA 1971, s 5(2)(b) that she was acting in order to persuade the Americans to leave the base, to reduce the threat of a nuclear strike, and thus protect her property. The court held that cutting the wire was far too remote from the eventual aim of protecting property to satisfy the test.
Answer
3

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Cr App R 74. In that case, the accused, a nuclear protestor, was arrested outside a nuclear submarine base. She was in possession of a hacksaw blade, which she intended to use to cut through the wire. She was charged under the CDA 1971, s <span>3 and unsuccessfully raised the defence under the CDA 1971, s 5(2)(b) that she was acting in order to persuade the Americans to leave the base, to reduce the threat of a nuclear strike,

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366275001612

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
The objective test was confirmed again in R v Hill and Hall (1998) 89 Cr App R 74. In that case, the accused, a nuclear protestor, was arrested outside a nuclear submarine base. She was in possession of a hacksaw blade, which she intended to use to cut through the wire. She was charged under the CDA 1971, s 3 and unsuccessfully raised the defence under the CDA 1971, s [...] that she was acting in order to persuade the Americans to leave the base, to reduce the threat of a nuclear strike, and thus protect her property. The court held that cutting the wire was far too remote from the eventual aim of protecting property to satisfy the test.
Answer
5(2)(b)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
was arrested outside a nuclear submarine base. She was in possession of a hacksaw blade, which she intended to use to cut through the wire. She was charged under the CDA 1971, s 3 and unsuccessfully raised the defence under the CDA 1971, s <span>5(2)(b) that she was acting in order to persuade the Americans to leave the base, to reduce the threat of a nuclear strike, and thus protect her property. The court held that cutting the wire

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366276574476

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
The objective test was confirmed again in R v Hill and Hall (1998) 89 Cr App R 74. In that case, the accused, a nuclear protestor, was arrested outside a nuclear submarine base. She was in possession of a hacksaw blade, which she intended to use to cut through the wire. She was charged under the CDA 1971, s 3 and unsuccessfully raised the defence under the CDA 1971, s 5(2)(b) that she was acting in order to persuade the Americans to leave the base, to reduce the threat of a nuclear strike, and thus protect her property. The court held that cutting the wire was [...].
Answer
far too remote from the eventual aim of protecting property to satisfy the test

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ly raised the defence under the CDA 1971, s 5(2)(b) that she was acting in order to persuade the Americans to leave the base, to reduce the threat of a nuclear strike, and thus protect her property. The court held that cutting the wire was <span>far too remote from the eventual aim of protecting property to satisfy the test.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366278409484

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
The CDA 1971, s [...] provides:

'A person who without lawful excuse destroys of damages any property, whether belonging to himself or another—

  1. intending to destroy or damage any property or being reckless as whether any property would be destroyed or damaged; and
  2. intending by the destruction or damage to endanger life of another or being reckless as to whether the life of another would be thereby endangered;

shall be guilty of an offence.'

Answer
1(2)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The CDA 1971, s 1(2) provides: 'A person who without lawful excuse destroys of damages any property, whether belonging to himself or another— intending to destroy or damage any prop

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366279982348

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
The CDA [year], s 1(2) provides:

'A person who without lawful excuse destroys of damages any property, whether belonging to himself or another—

  1. intending to destroy or damage any property or being reckless as whether any property would be destroyed or damaged; and
  2. intending by the destruction or damage to endanger life of another or being reckless as to whether the life of another would be thereby endangered;

shall be guilty of an offence.'

Answer
1971

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The CDA 1971, s 1(2) provides: 'A person who without lawful excuse destroys of damages any property, whether belonging to himself or another— intending to destroy or damage

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366282341644

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
The [statute] provides:

'A person who without lawful excuse destroys or damages any property, whether belonging to himself or another—

  1. intending to destroy or damage any property or being reckless as whether any property would be destroyed or damaged; and
  2. intending by the destruction or damage to endanger life of another or being reckless as to whether the life of another would be thereby endangered;

shall be guilty of an offence.'

Answer
CDA 1971, s 1(2)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The CDA 1971, s 1(2) provides: 'A person who without lawful excuse destroys of damages any property, whether belonging to himself or another— intending to destroy or damage any prop

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366284963084

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
Take care to note that, as a matter of actus reus, it is irrelevant whether the life of another was actually endangered. See the case of [case]
Answer
R v Sangha [1988] 2 All ER 385

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Take care to note that, as a matter of actus reus, it is irrelevant whether the life of another was actually endangered. See the case of R v Sangha [1988] 2 All ER 385

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366287322380

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
Take care to note that, as a matter of actus reus, it is [...]. See the case of R v Sangha [1988] 2 All ER 385
Answer
irrelevant whether the life of another was actually endangered

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Take care to note that, as a matter of actus reus, it is irrelevant whether the life of another was actually endangered. See the case of R v Sangha [1988] 2 All ER 385

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366290468108

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
If the damage is caused by fire, the risk to life will always be from the damaged property
Answer
R v Steer

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
If the damage is caused by fire, the risk to life will always be from the damaged property. Lord Bridge of Harwich pointed out in R v Steer: 'It is not the match and the inflammable materials, the flaming firebrand or any other inflammatory agent which the arsoni

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366292827404

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
If the damage is caused by fire, the risk to life will always be from the damaged property. Lord Bridge of Harwich pointed out in [case]:

'It is not the match and the inflammable materials, the flaming firebrand or any other inflammatory agent which the arsonist uses to start the fire which causes danger to life, it is the ensuing conflagration which occurs as the property which has been set on fire is damaged or destroyed. When [whether] the victim in the bedroom is overcome by the smoke or incinerated by the flames as the building burns, it would be absurd to say that this does not result from the damage to the building.'

Answer
R v Steer

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
If the damage is caused by fire, the risk to life will always be from the damaged property. Lord Bridge of Harwich pointed out in R v Steer: 'It is not the match and the inflammable materials, the flaming firebrand or any other inflammatory agent which the arsonist uses to start the fire which causes danger to

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366295186700

Tags
#cd #crime #law
Question
If the damage is caused by fire, the risk to life will always be from the damaged property. [who?] pointed out in R v Steer:

'It is not the match and the inflammable materials, the flaming firebrand or any other inflammatory agent which the arsonist uses to start the fire which causes danger to life, it is the ensuing conflagration which occurs as the property which has been set on fire is damaged or destroyed. When [whether] the victim in the bedroom is overcome by the smoke or incinerated by the flames as the building burns, it would be absurd to say that this does not result from the damage to the building.'

Answer
Lord Bridge of Harwich

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
If the damage is caused by fire, the risk to life will always be from the damaged property. Lord Bridge of Harwich pointed out in R v Steer: 'It is not the match and the inflammable materials, the flaming firebrand or any other inflammatory agent which the arsonist uses to start the fire

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366298856716

Tags
#crime #law #oapa
Question
An assault is committed when the accused 'intentionally, or recklessly, causes another person to apprehend immediate and unlawful personal violence': [case]
Answer
Fagan v MPC [1969] 1 QB 439.

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
An assault is committed when the accused 'intentionally, or recklessly, causes another person to apprehend immediate and unlawful personal violence': Fagan v MPC [1969] 1 QB 439.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366301216012

Tags
#crime #law #oapa
Question
An assault is committed when the accused '[...], causes another person to apprehend immediate and unlawful personal violence': Fagan v MPC [1969] 1 QB 439.
Answer
intentionally, or recklessly

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
An assault is committed when the accused 'intentionally, or recklessly, causes another person to apprehend immediate and unlawful personal violence': Fagan v MPC [1969] 1 QB 439.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366302788876

Tags
#crime #law #oapa
Question
An assault is committed when the accused 'intentionally, or recklessly, [...] to apprehend immediate and unlawful personal violence': Fagan v MPC [1969] 1 QB 439.
Answer
causes another person

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
An assault is committed when the accused 'intentionally, or recklessly, causes another person to apprehend immediate and unlawful personal violence': Fagan v MPC [1969] 1 QB 439.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366304361740

Tags
#crime #law #oapa
Question
An assault is committed when the accused 'intentionally, or recklessly, causes another person to [...] immediate and unlawful personal violence': Fagan v MPC [1969] 1 QB 439.
Answer
apprehend

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
An assault is committed when the accused 'intentionally, or recklessly, causes another person to apprehend immediate and unlawful personal violence': Fagan v MPC [1969] 1 QB 439.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366305934604

Tags
#crime #law #oapa
Question
An assault is committed when the accused 'intentionally, or recklessly, causes another person to apprehend [...]': Fagan v MPC [1969] 1 QB 439.
Answer
immediate and unlawful personal violence

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
An assault is committed when the accused 'intentionally, or recklessly, causes another person to apprehend immediate and unlawful personal violence': Fagan v MPC [1969] 1 QB 439.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366308818188

Tags
#crime #law #oapa
Question
If the victim is caused to apprehend such a threat, it is irrelevant that the defendant does not in fact have the means to carry out that threat.
Answer
Logdon v DPP [1976] Crim LR 121

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
If the victim is caused to apprehend such a threat, it is irrelevant that the defendant does not in fact have the means to carry out that threat. Logdon v DPP [1976] Crim LR 121

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366311439628

Tags
#crime #law #oapa
Question
If the victim is caused to apprehend such a threat, it is irrelevant that [...]. Logdon v DPP [1976] Crim LR 121
Answer
the defendant does not in fact have the means to carry out that threat

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
If the victim is caused to apprehend such a threat, it is irrelevant that the defendant does not in fact have the means to carry out that threat. Logdon v DPP [1976] Crim LR 121

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366313012492

Tags
#crime #law #oapa
Question
If the victim is [...], it is irrelevant that the defendant does not in fact have the means to carry out that threat. Logdon v DPP [1976] Crim LR 121
Answer
caused to apprehend such a threat

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
If the victim is caused to apprehend such a threat, it is irrelevant that the defendant does not in fact have the means to carry out that threat. Logdon v DPP [1976] Crim LR 121

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366315633932

Tags
#crime #law #oapa
Question
Logdon v DPP [1976] Crim LR 121
Answer
FACTS: The defendant showed the victim a pistol in a drawer, saying that it was loaded and declaring that he would hold her hostage. The defendant alone knew that the gun was a replica and unloaded, but his actions and words caused the victim to believe otherwise. HELD: The defendant was found to have committed an assault against the victim.

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Logdon v DPP [1976] Crim LR 121 FACTS: The defendant showed the victim a pistol in a drawer, saying that it was loaded and declaring that he would hold her hostage. The defendant alone knew that the gun was a replica a

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366317993228

Tags
#crime #law #oapa
Question
Logdon v DPP [1976] Crim LR 121 FACTS: The defendant showed the victim a pistol in a drawer, saying that it was loaded and declaring that he would hold her hostage. The defendant alone knew that the gun was a replica and unloaded, but his actions and words caused the victim to believe otherwise. HELD: [...].
Answer
The defendant was found to have committed an assault against the victim

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
the victim a pistol in a drawer, saying that it was loaded and declaring that he would hold her hostage. The defendant alone knew that the gun was a replica and unloaded, but his actions and words caused the victim to believe otherwise. HELD: <span>The defendant was found to have committed an assault against the victim.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366321925388

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Tracing is [...]
Answer
a process by which property or assets substituted for it can be identified in the hands of recipients.

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Tracing is a process by which property or assets substituted for it can be identified in the hands of recipients.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366325857548

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Tracing is neither a claim nor a remedy but a process. It is the process by which the plaintiff traces what has happened to his property, identifies the persons who have handled it or received it, and justifies his claim that the money which they handled or received can properly be regarded as representing his property. Per Millett LJ in [case].
Answer
Boscawen v Bajwa [1995] 4 All ER 769

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
es what has happened to his property, identifies the persons who have handled it or received it, and justifies his claim that the money which they handled or received can properly be regarded as representing his property. Per Millett LJ in <span>Boscawen v Bajwa [1995] 4 All ER 769.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366328216844

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Tracing is neither a claim nor a remedy but a process. It is the process by which the plaintiff traces what has happened to his property, identifies the persons who have handled it or received it, and justifies his claim that the money which they handled or received can properly be regarded as representing his property. Per [who?] in Boscawen v Bajwa [1995] 4 All ER 769.
Answer
Millett LJ

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
plaintiff traces what has happened to his property, identifies the persons who have handled it or received it, and justifies his claim that the money which they handled or received can properly be regarded as representing his property. Per <span>Millett LJ in Boscawen v Bajwa [1995] 4 All ER 769.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366330576140

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Tracing is neither a claim nor a remedy but a process. It is the process by which the plaintiff [...], identifies the persons who have handled it or received it, and justifies his claim that the money which they handled or received can properly be regarded as representing his property. Per Millett LJ in Boscawen v Bajwa [1995] 4 All ER 769.
Answer
traces what has happened to his property

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Tracing is neither a claim nor a remedy but a process. It is the process by which the plaintiff traces what has happened to his property, identifies the persons who have handled it or received it, and justifies his claim that the money which they handled or received can properly be regarded as representing his property

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366332149004

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Tracing is neither a claim nor a remedy but a process. It is the process by which the plaintiff traces what has happened to his property, [...], and justifies his claim that the money which they handled or received can properly be regarded as representing his property. Per Millett LJ in Boscawen v Bajwa [1995] 4 All ER 769.
Answer
identifies the persons who have handled it or received it

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Tracing is neither a claim nor a remedy but a process. It is the process by which the plaintiff traces what has happened to his property, identifies the persons who have handled it or received it, and justifies his claim that the money which they handled or received can properly be regarded as representing his property. Per Millett LJ in Boscawen v Bajwa [1995] 4 All ER 769.</

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366333721868

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Tracing is neither a claim nor a remedy but a process. It is the process by which the plaintiff traces what has happened to his property, identifies the persons who have handled it or received it, and [...]. Per Millett LJ in Boscawen v Bajwa [1995] 4 All ER 769.
Answer
justifies his claim that the money which they handled or received can properly be regarded as representing his property

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Tracing is neither a claim nor a remedy but a process. It is the process by which the plaintiff traces what has happened to his property, identifies the persons who have handled it or received it, and justifies his claim that the money which they handled or received can properly be regarded as representing his property. Per Millett LJ in Boscawen v Bajwa [1995] 4 All ER 769.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366335556876

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Following is [...].
Answer
the process of identifying the same asset as it moves from person to person

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Following is the process of identifying the same asset as it moves from person to person.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366338440460

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Tracing is [...].
Answer
the process of identifying a new asset as the substitute for the original

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Tracing is the process of identifying a new asset as the substitute for the original.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366341061900

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Taylor v Plumer (1815) 3 M. & S. 562
Answer
A client gave money to his stockbroker, Walsh, to invest. Walsh purchased bullion and investments with the money and was caught making off to America with them. It was held that the client could claim the bullion and investments. On Walsh’s bankruptcy, his assignees in bankruptcy sought to recover them from the defendant client. They failed.

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Taylor v Plumer (1815) 3 M. & S. 562, a client gave money to his stockbroker, Walsh, to invest. Walsh purchased bullion and investments with the money and was caught making off to America with them. It was held that the cl

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366345780492

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
The most usual remedy at common law is a personal claim against the recipient for the value of the property they have received. In the case of money, the action will be for money had and received. According to Millett J in [case]:

Tracing at common law ... serves an evidential purpose. The cause of action is for money had and received. Tracing at common law enables the defendant to be identified as the recipient of the plaintiff’s money and the measure of his liability to be determined by the amount of the plaintiff’s money he is shown to have received.

Answer
Agip (Africa) Ltd v Jackson [1990] Ch 265

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
d>The most usual remedy at common law is a personal claim against the recipient for the value of the property they have received. In the case of money, the action will be for money had and received. According to Millett J in Agip (Africa) Ltd v Jackson [1990] Ch 265: Tracing at common law ... serves an evidential purpose. The cause of action is for money had and received. Tracing at common law enables the defendant to be identified as

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366348139788

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
The most usual remedy at common law is a personal claim against the recipient for the value of the property they have received. In the case of money, the action will be for money had and received. According to [who] in Agip (Africa) Ltd v Jackson [1990] Ch 265:

Tracing at common law ... serves an evidential purpose. The cause of action is for money had and received. Tracing at common law enables the defendant to be identified as the recipient of the plaintiff’s money and the measure of his liability to be determined by the amount of the plaintiff’s money he is shown to have received.

Answer
Millett J

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
l>The most usual remedy at common law is a personal claim against the recipient for the value of the property they have received. In the case of money, the action will be for money had and received. According to Millett J in Agip (Africa) Ltd v Jackson [1990] Ch 265: Tracing at common law ... serves an evidential purpose. The cause of action is for money had and received. Tracing at common la

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366350499084

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
The most usual remedy at common law is a personal claim against the recipient for the value of the property they have received. In the case of money, the action will be for money had and received. According to Millett J in Agip (Africa) Ltd v Jackson [1990] Ch 265:

Tracing at common law ... serves an [...] purpose. The cause of action is for money had and received. Tracing at common law enables the defendant to be identified as the recipient of the plaintiff’s money and the measure of his liability to be determined by the amount of the plaintiff’s money he is shown to have received.

Answer
evidential

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
pient for the value of the property they have received. In the case of money, the action will be for money had and received. According to Millett J in Agip (Africa) Ltd v Jackson [1990] Ch 265: Tracing at common law ... serves an <span>evidential purpose. The cause of action is for money had and received. Tracing at common law enables the defendant to be identified as the recipient of the plaintiff’s money and the measure of his

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366352071948

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
The most usual remedy at common law is a personal claim against the recipient for the value of the property they have received. In the case of money, the action will be for money had and received. According to Millett J in Agip (Africa) Ltd v Jackson [1990] Ch 265:

Tracing at [...] ... serves an evidential purpose. The cause of action is for money had and received. Tracing at common law enables the defendant to be identified as the recipient of the plaintiff’s money and the measure of his liability to be determined by the amount of the plaintiff’s money he is shown to have received.

Answer
common law

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
al claim against the recipient for the value of the property they have received. In the case of money, the action will be for money had and received. According to Millett J in Agip (Africa) Ltd v Jackson [1990] Ch 265: Tracing at <span>common law ... serves an evidential purpose. The cause of action is for money had and received. Tracing at common law enables the defendant to be identified as the recipient of the plaintiff’s mone

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366353644812

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
The most usual remedy at common law is a personal claim against the recipient for the value of the property they have received. In the case of money, the action will be for money had and received. According to Millett J in Agip (Africa) Ltd v Jackson [1990] Ch 265:

Tracing at common law ... serves an evidential purpose. The cause of action is for [...]. Tracing at common law enables the defendant to be identified as the recipient of the plaintiff’s money and the measure of his liability to be determined by the amount of the plaintiff’s money he is shown to have received.

Answer
money had and received

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
eceived. In the case of money, the action will be for money had and received. According to Millett J in Agip (Africa) Ltd v Jackson [1990] Ch 265: Tracing at common law ... serves an evidential purpose. The cause of action is for <span>money had and received. Tracing at common law enables the defendant to be identified as the recipient of the plaintiff’s money and the measure of his liability to be determined by the amount of the plaintiff’

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366356528396

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
it may well be new trustees seeking to recover the trust property wrongfully given away by the old trustee ([case]) or a wrongdoing trustee trying to restore property to the trust (Montrose Investments Ltd v Oriin Nominees Ltd [2002] EWCA Civ 1032) or it could be a beneficiary under the trust seeking to recover the property to be held as part of the trust fund or for himself if absolutely entitled on termination of the trust.
Answer
Young v Murphy [1996] 1 Victoria Rep 279

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
it may well be new trustees seeking to recover the trust property wrongfully given away by the old trustee (Young v Murphy [1996] 1 Victoria Rep 279) or a wrongdoing trustee trying to restore property to the trust (Montrose Investments Ltd v Oriin Nominees Ltd [2002] EWCA Civ 1032) or it could be a beneficiary under the trust se

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366358887692

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
it may well be new trustees seeking to recover the trust property wrongfully given away by the old trustee (Young v Murphy [1996] 1 Victoria Rep 279) or a wrongdoing trustee trying to restore property to the trust ([case]) or it could be a beneficiary under the trust seeking to recover the property to be held as part of the trust fund or for himself if absolutely entitled on termination of the trust.
Answer
Montrose Investments Ltd v Oriin Nominees Ltd [2002] EWCA Civ 1032

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
head>it may well be new trustees seeking to recover the trust property wrongfully given away by the old trustee (Young v Murphy [1996] 1 Victoria Rep 279) or a wrongdoing trustee trying to restore property to the trust (Montrose Investments Ltd v Oriin Nominees Ltd [2002] EWCA Civ 1032) or it could be a beneficiary under the trust seeking to recover the property to be held as part of the trust fund or for himself if absolutely entitled on termination of the trust.</

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366361509132

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Where the claimant’s money is used to discharge a secured debt, the claimant is allowed to [...]
Answer
‘stand in the shoes’ of the creditor, and gain the benefit of the creditor’s charge

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Where the claimant’s money is used to discharge a secured debt, the claimant is allowed to ‘stand in the shoes’ of the creditor, and gain the benefit of the creditor’s charge

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366363344140

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Under The Limitation Act [year], a personal claim must be brought within six years. This does not apply to a proprietary remedy against a trustee within Limitation Act 1980, s 21(1), although the equitable doctrine of laches may apply in a rare case.
Answer
1980

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Under The Limitation Act 1980, a personal claim must be brought within six years. This does not apply to a proprietary remedy against a trustee within Limitation Act 1980, s 21(1), although the equitable doctrine

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366365703436

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Under The [statute] 1980, a personal claim must be brought within six years. This does not apply to a proprietary remedy against a trustee within Limitation Act 1980, s 21(1), although the equitable doctrine of laches may apply in a rare case.
Answer
Limitation Act

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Under The Limitation Act 1980, a personal claim must be brought within six years. This does not apply to a proprietary remedy against a trustee within Limitation Act 1980, s 21(1), although the equitable doctr

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366368062732

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Under The [statute], a personal claim must be brought within six years. This does not apply to a proprietary remedy against a trustee within Limitation Act 1980, s 21(1), although the equitable doctrine of laches may apply in a rare case.
Answer
Limitation Act 1980

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Under The Limitation Act 1980, a personal claim must be brought within six years. This does not apply to a proprietary remedy against a trustee within Limitation Act 1980, s 21(1), although the equitable doctrine

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366371208460

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Under The Limitation Act 1980, a [...] claim must be brought within six years. This does not apply to a proprietary remedy against a trustee within Limitation Act 1980, s 21(1), although the equitable doctrine of laches may apply in a rare case.
Answer
personal

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Under The Limitation Act 1980, a personal claim must be brought within six years. This does not apply to a proprietary remedy against a trustee within Limitation Act 1980, s 21(1), although the equitable doctrine of laches may

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366372781324

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Under The Limitation Act 1980, a personal claim must be brought within [...]. This does not apply to a proprietary remedy against a trustee within Limitation Act 1980, s 21(1), although the equitable doctrine of laches may apply in a rare case.
Answer
six years

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Under The Limitation Act 1980, a personal claim must be brought within six years. This does not apply to a proprietary remedy against a trustee within Limitation Act 1980, s 21(1), although the equitable doctrine of laches may apply in a rare case.</

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366374354188

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Under The Limitation Act 1980, a personal claim must be brought within six years. This does not apply to a [...] within Limitation Act 1980, s 21(1), although the equitable doctrine of laches may apply in a rare case.
Answer
proprietary remedy against a trustee

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Under The Limitation Act 1980, a personal claim must be brought within six years. This does not apply to a proprietary remedy against a trustee within Limitation Act 1980, s 21(1), although the equitable doctrine of laches may apply in a rare case.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366375927052

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Under The Limitation Act 1980, a personal claim must be brought within six years. This does not apply to a proprietary remedy against a trustee within [statute], s 21(1), although the equitable doctrine of laches may apply in a rare case.
Answer
Limitation Act 1980

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Under The Limitation Act 1980, a personal claim must be brought within six years. This does not apply to a proprietary remedy against a trustee within Limitation Act 1980, s 21(1), although the equitable doctrine of laches may apply in a rare case.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366378286348

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Under The Limitation Act 1980, a personal claim must be brought within six years. This does not apply to a proprietary remedy against a trustee within Limitation Act 1980, s [...], although the equitable doctrine of laches may apply in a rare case.
Answer
21(1)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Under The Limitation Act 1980, a personal claim must be brought within six years. This does not apply to a proprietary remedy against a trustee within Limitation Act 1980, s 21(1), although the equitable doctrine of laches may apply in a rare case.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366379859212

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Under The Limitation Act 1980, a personal claim must be brought within six years. This does not apply to a proprietary remedy against a trustee within [statute], although the equitable doctrine of laches may apply in a rare case.
Answer
Limitation Act 1980, s 21(1)

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Under The Limitation Act 1980, a personal claim must be brought within six years. This does not apply to a proprietary remedy against a trustee within Limitation Act 1980, s 21(1), although the equitable doctrine of laches may apply in a rare case.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366383791372

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Property can be traced at common law as long as [...].
Answer
the means of identifying it still exist

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Property can be traced at common law as long as the means of identifying it still exist.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366385364236

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Property can be traced at common law as long as the means of identifying it still exist. This is straightforward where the property being traced is the original asset, but becomes difficult where the property has changed form, e.g. by being substituted or exchanged for other property or mixed with something else. It is no objection if the original property has been substituted for other property provided [...]. For example, where money was used to buy investments and bullion: Taylor v Plumer (1819) 3 M&S 562, or has been paid into a separate bank account: Banque Belge pour L’Etranger v Hambrouck [1921] 1 KB 321.
Answer
the property or its product has at all times remained identifiable

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
but becomes difficult where the property has changed form, e.g. by being substituted or exchanged for other property or mixed with something else. It is no objection if the original property has been substituted for other property provided <span>the property or its product has at all times remained identifiable. For example, where money was used to buy investments and bullion: Taylor v Plumer (1819) 3 M&S 562, or has been paid into a separate bank account: Banque Belge pour L’Etranger v

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366386937100

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Property can be traced at common law as long as the means of identifying it still exist. This is straightforward where the property being traced is the original asset, but becomes difficult where the property has changed form, e.g. by being substituted or exchanged for other property or mixed with something else. It is no objection if the original property has been substituted for other property provided the property or its product has at all times remained identifiable. For example, where money was used to buy investments and bullion: [case], or has been paid into a separate bank account: Banque Belge pour L’Etranger v Hambrouck [1921] 1 KB 321.
Answer
Taylor v Plumer (1819) 3 M&S 562

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
ething else. It is no objection if the original property has been substituted for other property provided the property or its product has at all times remained identifiable. For example, where money was used to buy investments and bullion: <span>Taylor v Plumer (1819) 3 M&S 562, or has been paid into a separate bank account: Banque Belge pour L’Etranger v Hambrouck [1921] 1 KB 321.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366389296396

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Property can be traced at common law as long as the means of identifying it still exist. This is straightforward where the property being traced is the original asset, but becomes difficult where the property has changed form, e.g. by being substituted or exchanged for other property or mixed with something else. It is no objection if the original property has been substituted for other property provided the property or its product has at all times remained identifiable. For example, where money was used to buy investments and bullion: Taylor v Plumer (1819) 3 M&S 562, or has been paid into a separate bank account: [case].
Answer
Banque Belge pour L’Etranger v Hambrouck [1921] 1 KB 321

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
er property provided the property or its product has at all times remained identifiable. For example, where money was used to buy investments and bullion: Taylor v Plumer (1819) 3 M&S 562, or has been paid into a separate bank account: <span>Banque Belge pour L’Etranger v Hambrouck [1921] 1 KB 321.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366391917836

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
In the case of money, unless the actual coins or notes can be identified, the claimant must use the action for money had and received.
Answer
Lipkin Gorman v Karpnale Ltd [1991] 2 AC 548

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In the case of money, unless the actual coins or notes can be identified, the claimant must use the action for money had and received. Here the tracing process is used to identify the defendant as having received the claimant’s money. The claimant then seeks to recover an equivalent sum via a personal claim.</s

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366395325708

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Commerzbank AG v Gareth Price-Jones [2003] EWCA Civ 1663
Answer
the defendant banker attempted to use change of position as a defence to an action by his employer bank for return of a bonus they had paid twice by mistake. The defendant had not spent the additional bonus yet, and so could not be said to have been ‘disenriched’ as required by Lord Goff, but argued that he had believed the second payment was intended to increase his entitlement in recognition of his services, and that this had induced him not to seek higher remuneration elsewhere. The Court of Appeal did not accept that this was a relevant change of position, as the defendant had not done anything sufficiently significant or substantial in reliance on the receipt. However, the court kept open the possibility that a relevant change of position could arise even where, as here, no expenditure had been incurred.

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Subsequent case law has attempted to expand on this definition of a qualifying change of position in reliance. In Commerzbank AG v Gareth Price-Jones [2003] EWCA Civ 1663, the defendant banker attempted to use change of position as a defence to an action by his employer bank for return of a bonus they had paid twice by mistake. The defendant had not spen

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366397947148

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Subsequent case law has attempted to expand on this definition of a qualifying change of position in reliance. In [case], the defendant banker attempted to use change of position as a defence to an action by his employer bank for return of a bonus they had paid twice by mistake. The defendant had not spent the additional bonus yet, and so could not be said to have been ‘disenriched’ as required by Lord Goff, but argued that he had believed the second payment was intended to increase his entitlement in recognition of his services, and that this had induced him not to seek higher remuneration elsewhere. The Court of Appeal did not accept that this was a relevant change of position, as the defendant had not done anything sufficiently significant or substantial in reliance on the receipt. However, the court kept open the possibility that a relevant change of position could arise even where, as here, no expenditure had been incurred. Munby J in particular emphasised that the defence was not restricted to cases of disenrichment, although it has not been applied outside this context yet.
Answer
Commerzbank AG v Gareth Price-Jones [2003] EWCA Civ 1663

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Subsequent case law has attempted to expand on this definition of a qualifying change of position in reliance. In Commerzbank AG v Gareth Price-Jones [2003] EWCA Civ 1663, the defendant banker attempted to use change of position as a defence to an action by his employer bank for return of a bonus they had paid twice by mistake. The defendant had not spen

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366400306444

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Subsequent case law has attempted to expand on this definition of a qualifying change of position in reliance. In Commerzbank AG v Gareth Price-Jones [2003] EWCA Civ 1663, the defendant banker attempted to use change of position as a defence to an action by his employer bank for return of a bonus they had paid twice by mistake. The defendant had not spent the additional bonus yet, and so could not be said to have been ‘disenriched’ as required by Lord Goff, but argued that he had believed the second payment was intended to increase his entitlement in recognition of his services, and that this had induced him not to seek higher remuneration elsewhere. The Court of Appeal did not accept that this was a relevant change of position, as the defendant had not done anything [...] on the receipt. However, the court kept open the possibility that a relevant change of position could arise even where, as here, no expenditure had been incurred. Munby J in particular emphasised that the defence was not restricted to cases of disenrichment, although it has not been applied outside this context yet.
Answer
sufficiently significant or substantial in reliance

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
se his entitlement in recognition of his services, and that this had induced him not to seek higher remuneration elsewhere. The Court of Appeal did not accept that this was a relevant change of position, as the defendant had not done anything <span>sufficiently significant or substantial in reliance on the receipt. However, the court kept open the possibility that a relevant change of position could arise even where, as here, no expenditure had been incurred. Munby J in particular e

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366403190028

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
The fiduciary relationship need not be between the claimant and the defendant. The Court of Appeal in [case] held that the claimant must show that there is a fiduciary relationship between himself and the defendant or between himself and a person who transferred the property to the defendant.
Answer
Re Diplock

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The fiduciary relationship need not be between the claimant and the defendant. The Court of Appeal in Re Diplock held that the claimant must show that there is a fiduciary relationship between himself and the defendant or between himself and a person who transferred the property to the defendant.</

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366405549324

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
The fiduciary relationship need not be between the claimant and the defendant. The Court of Appeal in Re Diplock held that the claimant must show that there is a fiduciary relationship between [...] or between himself and a person who transferred the property to the defendant.
Answer
himself and the defendant

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
The fiduciary relationship need not be between the claimant and the defendant. The Court of Appeal in Re Diplock held that the claimant must show that there is a fiduciary relationship between himself and the defendant or between himself and a person who transferred the property to the defendant.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366408695052

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
The fiduciary relationship need not be between the claimant and the defendant. The Court of Appeal in Re Diplock held that the claimant must show that there is a fiduciary relationship between himself and the defendant or between [...].
Answer
himself and a person who transferred the property to the defendant

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
>The fiduciary relationship need not be between the claimant and the defendant. The Court of Appeal in Re Diplock held that the claimant must show that there is a fiduciary relationship between himself and the defendant or between himself and a person who transferred the property to the defendant.<body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366412102924

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Property can only be traced if it is [...]. If it has been dissipated, e.g. spent on food, drink or a holiday, it will no longer be identifiable and cannot be traced.
Answer
identifiable

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Property can only be traced if it is identifiable. If it has been dissipated, e.g. spent on food, drink or a holiday, it will no longer be identifiable and cannot be traced.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366413937932

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Property can only be traced if it is identifiable. If it has been dissipated, e.g. spent on food, drink or a holiday, it will no longer be identifiable and cannot be traced. Similarly money paid into an overdrawn bank account ([case]) or spent paying off other unsecured debts (as in Re Diplock) cannot be traced. Indeed, if S tries to create a trust of his money by sending his cheque to T Ltd expressly so that the money will be held on trust for him, no trust ever arises if the money was lost by payment into an overdrawn bank account: Re BA Peters plc [2008] EWCA Civ 1604.
Answer
Bishopsgate Investment Management v Homan [1995] Ch 211

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Property can only be traced if it is identifiable. If it has been dissipated, e.g. spent on food, drink or a holiday, it will no longer be identifiable and cannot be traced. Similarly money paid into an overdrawn bank account (Bishopsgate Investment Management v Homan [1995] Ch 211) or spent paying off other unsecured debts (as in Re Diplock) cannot be traced. Indeed, if S tries to create a trust of his money by sending his cheque to T Ltd expressly so that the

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366416297228

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Property can only be traced if it is identifiable. If it has been dissipated, e.g. spent on food, drink or a holiday, it will no longer be identifiable and cannot be traced. Similarly money paid into an overdrawn bank account (Bishopsgate Investment Management v Homan [1995] Ch 211) or spent paying off other unsecured debts (as in [case]) cannot be traced. Indeed, if S tries to create a trust of his money by sending his cheque to T Ltd expressly so that the money will be held on trust for him, no trust ever arises if the money was lost by payment into an overdrawn bank account: Re BA Peters plc [2008] EWCA Civ 1604.
Answer
Re Diplock

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
od, drink or a holiday, it will no longer be identifiable and cannot be traced. Similarly money paid into an overdrawn bank account (Bishopsgate Investment Management v Homan [1995] Ch 211) or spent paying off other unsecured debts (as in <span>Re Diplock) cannot be traced. Indeed, if S tries to create a trust of his money by sending his cheque to T Ltd expressly so that the money will be held on trust for him, no trust ever arises i

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366418656524

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Property can only be traced if it is identifiable. If it has been dissipated, e.g. spent on food, drink or a holiday, it will no longer be identifiable and cannot be traced. Similarly money paid into [...] (Bishopsgate Investment Management v Homan [1995] Ch 211) or spent paying off other unsecured debts (as in Re Diplock) cannot be traced. Indeed, if S tries to create a trust of his money by sending his cheque to T Ltd expressly so that the money will be held on trust for him, no trust ever arises if the money was lost by payment into an overdrawn bank account: Re BA Peters plc [2008] EWCA Civ 1604.
Answer
an overdrawn bank account

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Property can only be traced if it is identifiable. If it has been dissipated, e.g. spent on food, drink or a holiday, it will no longer be identifiable and cannot be traced. Similarly money paid into an overdrawn bank account (Bishopsgate Investment Management v Homan [1995] Ch 211) or spent paying off other unsecured debts (as in Re Diplock) cannot be traced. Indeed, if S tries to create a trust of his mon

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366420229388

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Property can only be traced if it is identifiable. If it has been dissipated, e.g. spent on food, drink or a holiday, it will no longer be identifiable and cannot be traced. Similarly money paid into an overdrawn bank account (Bishopsgate Investment Management v Homan [1995] Ch 211) or spent [...] (as in Re Diplock) cannot be traced. Indeed, if S tries to create a trust of his money by sending his cheque to T Ltd expressly so that the money will be held on trust for him, no trust ever arises if the money was lost by payment into an overdrawn bank account: Re BA Peters plc [2008] EWCA Civ 1604.
Answer
paying off other unsecured debts

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
it has been dissipated, e.g. spent on food, drink or a holiday, it will no longer be identifiable and cannot be traced. Similarly money paid into an overdrawn bank account (Bishopsgate Investment Management v Homan [1995] Ch 211) or spent <span>paying off other unsecured debts (as in Re Diplock) cannot be traced. Indeed, if S tries to create a trust of his money by sending his cheque to T Ltd expressly so that the money will be held on trust for him, no tr

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366422850828

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Indeed, if S tries to create a trust of his money by sending his cheque to T Ltd expressly so that the money will be held on trust for him, no trust ever arises if the money was lost by payment into an overdrawn bank account: [case].
Answer
Re BA Peters plc [2008] EWCA Civ 1604

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
body>Indeed, if S tries to create a trust of his money by sending his cheque to T Ltd expressly so that the money will be held on trust for him, no trust ever arises if the money was lost by payment into an overdrawn bank account: Re BA Peters plc [2008] EWCA Civ 1604.<body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366426258700

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
If trust property has been kept separate, it can be reclaimed.

If it has been sold, the beneficiaries can [...].

If the wrongdoer has used trust funds to purchase other property, the claimant has a choice of remedies. In Re Hallett’s Estate (1880) 13 Ch D 696, it was held that the claimant may elect either to take the property or to have a charge over the property for the amount of his money expended in its purchase. If the property has appreciated, the claimant would be best advised to take the property, but if it has depreciated, he would be best advised to have a charge over the property and sue the defendant for the balance.
Answer
trace into and claim the proceeds of sale

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
If trust property has been kept separate, it can be reclaimed. If it has been sold, the beneficiaries can trace into and claim the proceeds of sale. If the wrongdoer has used trust funds to purchase other property, the claimant has a choice of remedies. In Re Hallett’s Estate (1880) 13 Ch D 696, it was held that the clai

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366427831564

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
If trust property has been kept separate, it can [...].

If it has been sold, the beneficiaries can trace into and claim the proceeds of sale.

If the wrongdoer has used trust funds to purchase other property, the claimant has a choice of remedies. In Re Hallett’s Estate (1880) 13 Ch D 696, it was held that the claimant may elect either to take the property or to have a charge over the property for the amount of his money expended in its purchase. If the property has appreciated, the claimant would be best advised to take the property, but if it has depreciated, he would be best advised to have a charge over the property and sue the defendant for the balance.
Answer
be reclaimed

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
If trust property has been kept separate, it can be reclaimed. If it has been sold, the beneficiaries can trace into and claim the proceeds of sale. If the wrongdoer has used trust funds to purchase other property, the claima

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366429404428

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
If the wrongdoer has used trust funds to purchase other property, the claimant has a choice of remedies
Answer
Re Hallett’s Estate (1880) 13 Ch D 696

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
If trust property has been kept separate, it can be reclaimed. If it has been sold, the beneficiaries can trace into and claim the proceeds of sale. If the wrongdoer has used trust funds to purchase other property, the claimant has a choice of remedies. In Re Hallett’s Estate (1880) 13 Ch D 696, it was held that the claimant may elect either to take the property or to have a charge over the property for the amount of his money expende

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366431763724

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
If trust property has been kept separate, it can be reclaimed.

If it has been sold, the beneficiaries can trace into and claim the proceeds of sale.

If the wrongdoer has used trust funds to purchase other property, the claimant has a choice of remedies. In [case], it was held that the claimant may elect either to take the property or to have a charge over the property for the amount of his money expended in its purchase. If the property has appreciated, the claimant would be best advised to take the property, but if it has depreciated, he would be best advised to have a charge over the property and sue the defendant for the balance.
Answer
Re Hallett’s Estate (1880) 13 Ch D 696

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
rate, it can be reclaimed. If it has been sold, the beneficiaries can trace into and claim the proceeds of sale. If the wrongdoer has used trust funds to purchase other property, the claimant has a choice of remedies. In <span>Re Hallett’s Estate (1880) 13 Ch D 696, it was held that the claimant may elect either to take the property or to have a charge over the property for the amount of his money expended in its purchase. If the property has appr

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366434647308

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
If the wrongdoer has used trust funds to purchase other property, the claimant has a choice of remedies. In Re Hallett’s Estate (1880) 13 Ch D 696, it was held that the claimant may elect [...]. If the property has appreciated, the claimant would be best advised to take the property, but if it has depreciated, he would be best advised to have a charge over the property and sue the defendant for the balance.
Answer
either to take the property or to have a charge over the property for the amount of his money expended in its purchase

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
If the wrongdoer has used trust funds to purchase other property, the claimant has a choice of remedies. In Re Hallett’s Estate (1880) 13 Ch D 696, it was held that the claimant may elect either to take the property or to have a charge over the property for the amount of his money expended in its purchase. If the property has appreciated, the claimant would be best advised to take the property, but if it has depreciated, he would be best advised to have a charge over the property and sue

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366436482316

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
If the wrongdoer has used trust funds to purchase other property, the claimant has a choice of remedies. In Re Hallett’s Estate (1880) 13 Ch D 696, it was held that the claimant may elect either to take the property or to have a charge over the property for the amount of his money expended in its purchase. If the property has appreciated, the claimant would be best advised to [...], but if it has depreciated, he would be best advised to have a charge over the property and sue the defendant for the balance.
Answer
take the property

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
3 Ch D 696, it was held that the claimant may elect either to take the property or to have a charge over the property for the amount of his money expended in its purchase. If the property has appreciated, the claimant would be best advised to <span>take the property, but if it has depreciated, he would be best advised to have a charge over the property and sue the defendant for the balance.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366438055180

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
If the wrongdoer has used trust funds to purchase other property, the claimant has a choice of remedies. In Re Hallett’s Estate (1880) 13 Ch D 696, it was held that the claimant may elect either to take the property or to have a charge over the property for the amount of his money expended in its purchase. If the property has appreciated, the claimant would be best advised to take the property, but if it has depreciated, he would be best advised to [...].
Answer
have a charge over the property and sue the defendant for the balance

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
perty or to have a charge over the property for the amount of his money expended in its purchase. If the property has appreciated, the claimant would be best advised to take the property, but if it has depreciated, he would be best advised to <span>have a charge over the property and sue the defendant for the balance.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366439890188

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Where the trustee has mixed the funds of two or more trusts, the two trusts must share the funds rateably
Answer
Re Diplock

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Where the trustee has mixed the funds of two or more trusts, according to Re Diplock, the two trusts must share the funds rateably

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366442249484

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Where the trustee has mixed the funds of two or more trusts, according to Re Diplock, the two trusts must share the funds [...]
Answer
rateably

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Where the trustee has mixed the funds of two or more trusts, according to Re Diplock, the two trusts must share the funds rateably

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366443822348

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Where the trustee has mixed the funds of two or more trusts, according to Re Diplock, the two trusts must [...]
Answer
share the funds rateably

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Where the trustee has mixed the funds of two or more trusts, according to Re Diplock, the two trusts must share the funds rateably

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366445395212

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Where the trustee has [...], according to Re Diplock, the two trusts must share the funds rateably
Answer
mixed the funds of two or more trusts

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Where the trustee has mixed the funds of two or more trusts, according to Re Diplock, the two trusts must share the funds rateably

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366448016652

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
The same rule that funds must be shared rateably applies where the funds of an innocent volunteer (sometimes referred to as an innocent contributor in such circumstances) have been mixed with funds belonging to a trust. This is whether the mixing was done by the trustee or the other contributor himself - [case]. So, for example, if the trustee wrongly gives £6,000 of Trust A’s money to his son, an innocent volunteer, and the son buys property with that £6,000 and £2,000 of his own money, the property will be owned three quarters by the Trust A and one quarter by the son. If the property goes down in value, Trust A will not be able to claim an equitable charge for £6,000, as that would prejudice the son’s claim.
Answer
Re Diplock

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
the funds of an innocent volunteer (sometimes referred to as an innocent contributor in such circumstances) have been mixed with funds belonging to a trust. This is whether the mixing was done by the trustee or the other contributor himself - <span>Re Diplock. So, for example, if the trustee wrongly gives £6,000 of Trust A’s money to his son, an innocent volunteer, and the son buys property with that £6,000 and £2,000 of his own money, the p

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366450638092

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Where a secured debt is paid off with the use of misappropriated assets, subrogation allows the debt to be ‘revived’ in favour of the party whose money was used to pay off the original secured debt.
Answer
Boscawen v Bajwa [1995] 4 All ER 769

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
However, this is a distinct type of subrogation specifically entitled reviving subrogation. Where a secured debt is paid off with the use of misappropriated assets, subrogation allows the debt to be ‘revived’ in favour of the party whose money was used to pay off the original secured debt.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366453259532

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Boscawen v Bajwa [1995] 4 All ER 769
Answer
The simplified facts were that Mr Bajwa had entered into a contract to sell his house. The house was mortgaged to the Halifax Building Society. The contract, unknown to the parties, failed to comply with s2 Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 and so was void. The purchaser sought a loan from Abbey National, which paid the loan money to the purchaser’s solicitors. As a result of a muddle between them and Mr Bajwa’s solicitors, this money was paid over to the Halifax Building Society before the transfer of title to the purchaser was completed. The Halifax used the money to discharge its mortgage. The transfer was not completed and the sale fell through. Abbey National sought to trace its money and have a charge over the property by way of subrogation to the Halifax Building Society; that is, Abbey National wished to step into the shoes of the Halifax and have a charge over Mr Bajwa’s house. The Court of Appeal allowed this, holding that the charge had not been redeemed for Mr Bajwa’s benefit. Thus where the claimant’s money has been used to pay off secured debts, he may be subrogated to the position of the creditor and be given a charge over the property. However, it is important to realise that the terms of the revived mortgage can be no more favourable to the claimant than the terms of the original mortgage were to the original lender.

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
In Boscawen v Bajwa [1995] 4 All ER 769, the simplified facts were that Mr Bajwa had entered into a contract to sell his house. The house was mortgaged to the Halifax Building Society. The contract, unknown to the parties,

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366455880972

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Where the claimant’s money is paid into the wrongdoer’s bank account and mixed with the wrongdoer’s money, the claimant has an equitable charge on the bank account for the amount of money paid in.
Answer
Re Hallett’s Estate.

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
Where the claimant’s money is paid into the wrongdoer’s bank account and mixed with the wrongdoer’s money, the claimant has an equitable charge on the bank account for the amount of money paid in - Re Hallett’s Estate.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366459813132

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
When payments are made out of a mixed bank account, the claimant’s equitable charge over the mixed fund attaches to assets purchased with such payments.
Answer
El Ajou Dollar Land Holdings plc [1993] 3 All ER 717 at 736

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
When payments are made out of a mixed bank account, the claimant’s equitable charge over the mixed fund attaches to assets purchased with such payments: El Ajou Dollar Land Holdings plc [1993] 3 All ER 717 at 736.

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366464793868

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Where property bought with earlier payments out of the bank account has gone up in value, it would be to the claimant’s advantage to trace his money into this property rather than simply claiming his money in the account. The starting point is that where a trustee wrongfully uses trust money mixed with his own, whether in one bank account or using money from the trust account with money from his own account, to buy an asset, the beneficiary is entitled at his option either to claim a proportionate share of the asset or to enforce a lien upon it to secure a personal claim against the trustee for the amount of the misapplied money
Answer
Foskett v McKeown [2001] 1 AC 102 at 131.

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
to buy an asset, the beneficiary is entitled at his option either to claim a proportionate share of the asset or to enforce a lien upon it to secure a personal claim against the trustee for the amount of the misapplied money: Lord Millett in <span>Foskett v McKeown [2001] 1 AC 102 at 131.<span><body><html>

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs







Flashcard 1366467153164

Tags
#equity #law #tracing
Question
Where property bought with earlier payments out of the bank account has gone up in value, it would be to the claimant’s advantage to trace his money into this property rather than simply claiming his money in the account. The starting point is that where a trustee wrongfully uses trust money mixed with his own, whether in one bank account or using money from the trust account with money from his own account, to buy an asset, the beneficiary is entitled at his option either [...]: Lord Millett in Foskett v McKeown [2001] 1 AC 102 at 131.
Answer
to claim a proportionate share of the asset or to enforce a lien upon it to secure a personal claim against the trustee for the amount of the misapplied money

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Pare