- Published on
kembaraXtra- Case Law-Widdowson (1985)
Key Facts:
Whether D's actions constituted an "attempt" to obtain services by deception, specifically whether they were sufficiently proximate to the full offense.
Court's Ruling (Held):
The court distinguished between providing false information (preparatory) and the actual act of obtaining the hire purchase services (the intended full offense). The former was not sufficiently close to the latter to qualify as an attempt.
Key Facts:
- Defendant (D): Widdowson.
- Context: D sought to acquire a van via hire purchase.
- Action 1: D provided false particulars (neighbor's name and address) on a hire purchase form, knowing himself to be uncreditworthy.
- Action 2: D accidentally signed the form with his own name.
- Charge: Attempting to obtain services by deception.
Whether D's actions constituted an "attempt" to obtain services by deception, specifically whether they were sufficiently proximate to the full offense.
Court's Ruling (Held):
- D's act of giving false particulars was deemed merely preparatory.
- Reasoning: Even if the hire purchase company had responded favorably, D would still have needed to seek a hire purchase agreement to complete the transaction.
- D's acts were considered remotely connected to the alleged attempted offense, not "immediately" connected.
- Outcome: No conviction.
- Proximity of Acts for Attempt: For an act to constitute an attempt, it must be more than merely preparatory; it must be immediately, rather than remotely, connected to the commission of the full offense.
- Preparation: Actions taken towards the commission of a crime but not yet directly aimed at its execution.
- Attempt: Actions that move beyond mere preparation and are a direct step towards the commission of the crime.
The court distinguished between providing false information (preparatory) and the actual act of obtaining the hire purchase services (the intended full offense). The former was not sufficiently close to the latter to qualify as an attempt.
0 Comments