- Published on
Kembaraxtra-Case Law-R v Small (1988) CA - Dishonesty in Theft
Case Facts:
Case Facts:
- Defendant (D): Charged with theft of a car.
- D's Admission: Admitted to taking the car.
- D's Defence: Believed the car was abandoned property and therefore not capable of being stolen, citing:
- Car parked stationary for two weeks, unlocked, keys in ignition.
- Flat tire and dead battery.
- Empty petrol tank and non-functional windscreen wipers.
- Initial Outcome: D was convicted.
- Appeal Allowed: D's conviction was overturned.
- Two-Part Test for Dishonesty (Objective/Subjective): The jury should have been directed to consider:
- Objective Test: Whether, according to the standards of the ordinary, reasonable, and honest person, what D did was dishonest.
- Subjective Test: If the act was objectively dishonest, whether D must have realised that what he was doing was dishonest by the standards of ordinary, reasonable, and honest people.
0 Comments