Anandagoda v The Queen

JurisdictionUK Non-devolved
Judgment Date1962
Date1962
Year1962
CourtPrivy Council
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
14 cases
  • Nguyen Tuong Van v Public Prosecutor
    • Singapore
    • Court of Appeal (Singapore)
    • 20 October 2004
    ...Evidence Act. The question is whether the contents of the cautioned statement is a confession. In the case of Anandagoda v. The QueenWLR [1962] 1 WLR 817 at 823–4, Lord Guest set out the test in this way: 22. We note that the appellant made the cautioned statement to ASP Toh in the usual wa......
  • Yusof bin A Samad v Public Prosecutor
    • Singapore
    • High Court (Singapore)
    • 4 September 2000
    ...a court should still conduct voir dires to determine the voluntariness of such statements: at [12]. Anandagoda v R [1962] MLJ 289; [1962] 1 WLR 817 (folld) Chai Chien Wei Kelvin v PP [1998] 3 SLR (R) 619; [1999] 1 SLR 25 (folld) Chan Wing Seng v PP [1997] 1 SLR (R) 721; [1997] 2 SLR 426 (re......
  • Panya Martmontree and Others v Public Prosecutor
    • Singapore
    • Court of Appeal (Singapore)
    • 7 August 1995
    ... ... In Anandagoda v The Queen , it was held that whether a statement amounts to a confession depends on whether: ... to the mind of a reasonable person ... ...
  • Kraisak Sakha and Another v Public Prosecutor
    • Singapore
    • Court of Appeal (Singapore)
    • 24 May 1996
    ...confirmed: at [29] and [30]. Abdul Rashid bin Mohamed v PP [1993] 3 SLR (R) 656; [1994] 1 SLR 119 (folld) Anandagoda v R [1962] MLJ 289; [1962] 1 WLR 817 (folld) Chin Seow Noi v PP [1993] 3 SLR (R) 566; [1994] 1 SLR 135 (folld) Wong Mimi v PP [1971-1973] SLR (R) 412; [1972-1974] SLR 73 (fol......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Criminal Procedure, Evidence and Sentencing
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Annual Review No. 2007, December 2007
    • 1 December 2007
    ...‘amounted to confessions which could be construed as confessions to murder under the Anandagoda test [Anandagoda v R[1962] MLJ 289; [1962] 1 WLR 817]’. SENTENCING Young offenders 12.18 The four classical principles of sentencing are retribution, rehabilitation, prevention and deterrence. In......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT