Recently, the Court of,4ppeal in Daniel Vijay s/o Katherasan v. Public Prosecutor took the view thatthe law on common intention was not adequately settled in Singapore despite the 138-year history ofs. 34 ofthe Penal Code. It went on to give an extensive review of the cases interpreting the section aswell as its Indian equivalent, before setting out the proper approach to take in "twin crime" commonintention cases, focusing specifically on the mens rea element required in order to establish constructiveliabilityfor the secondary crime. This case note seeks to highlight the changes brought about byDaniel Vijay s/o Katherasan v. Public Prosecutor andto comment on the significance ofthese changes.
Dispute Resolution and Arbitration
Singapore Law Review
National University of Singapore Faculty of Law
Raising the Bar for the Mens Rea Requirement in Common Intention Cases: Daniel Vijay s/o Katherasan v PP. (2011). Singapore Law Review. 29, 21-33. Research Collection School Of Law.
Available at: http://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/2302
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.