KembaraXtra-Case Law-Attempted Theft: Gullefer (1987)

Case Summary

• Case Name: Gullefer (1987)
• Facts: The defendant (D) attempted to stop a greyhound race by climbing onto the track. His motive was to prevent his dog from losing and recover his bet. Stewards did not stop the race.
• Initial Conviction: D was convicted of attempted theft.
• Appeal Ground: D appealed, arguing his actions were merely preparatory.

Legal Principle: Actus Reus of Attempt

• Key Concept: For an attempt to be established, the defendant must have moved beyond "merely preparatory" acts and embarked upon the "crime proper."
• Lord Lane LCJ's Formulation: The actus reus of attempt is satisfied "when the merely preparatory acts come to an end and the defendant embarks upon the crime proper. When that is will depend, of course, upon the facts in any particular case."
• Application to Gullefer:
• Decision: D's actions of jumping onto the track were deemed merely preparatory.
• Reasoning: At that stage, D could not be said to be in the process of committing theft, nor had he committed acts more than merely preparatory to the offence.
• Outcome: D's appeal was successful; conviction for attempted theft quashed.

Important Takeaway

• The distinction between "merely preparatory" acts and "committing the crime proper" is crucial for establishing the actus reus of attempt.
• This distinction is highly fact-dependent.