Publication Type

Journal Article

Version

Publisher’s Version

Publication Date

9-2009

Abstract

The Court of Appeal recently delivered an important judgment on liability for common intention. This criminal law doctrine has demanded clarification for some time, especially in regards to what is commonly known as “twin crime” situations, ie, situations where there is a primary criminal act as well as a collateral criminal act incidental to the main goal of the participants to the primary crime. In the “twin crime” situation, the participants would have intended to commit the primary criminal act but not all would have shared in the intention of one or more unidentified members of the group to also commit the collateral criminal act. This note considers if the court came to an appropriate conclusion on the law.

Discipline

Public Law and Legal Theory

Research Areas

Law, Society and Governance

Publication

Singapore Academy of Law Journal

Volume

21

Issue

2

First Page

557

Last Page

574

ISSN

0219-6638

Publisher

Singapore Academy of Law

Copyright Owner and License

Authors

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