Publication Type

Journal Article

Publication Date

1-2011

Abstract

Recently, the Court of Appeal in Daniel Vijay s/o Katherasan v. Public Prosecutor took the view that the law on common intention was not adequately settled in Singapore despite the 138-year history of s.34 of the Penal Code. It went on to give an extensive review of the cases interpreting the section as well as its Indian equivalent, before setting out the proper approach to take in "twin crime" common intention cases, focusing specifically on the mens rea element required in order to establish constructive liabilityfor the secondary crime. This case note seeks to highlight the changes brought about by Daniel Vijay s/o Katherasan v. Public Prosecutor and to comment on the significance of these changes.

Discipline

Criminal Law | Law Enforcement and Corrections

Research Areas

Dispute Resolution

Publication

Singapore Law Review

Volume

29

First Page

21

Last Page

34

ISSN

0080-9691

Publisher

National University of Singapore Faculty of Law

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.

Share

COinS