Recent Developments in Common Intention: Lee Chez Kee v PP [2008] 3 SLR 447 [Case Note]

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 wel...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: KHNG, Nathaniel Yong Ern, CHEN, Siyuan
Format: text
Language:English
Published: Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University 2009
Subjects:
Online Access:https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/930
https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/sol_research/article/1929/viewcontent/2009_21_SAcLJ_557_NathanielKhng_ChenSiyuan_.pdf
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Singapore Management University
Language: English
Description
Summary: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.