R v Hinks (Karen Maria)
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | THE VICE PRESIDENT,MR JUSTICE DYSON |
| Judgment Date | 26 June 1998 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [1998] EWCA Crim J0626-12 |
| Date | 26 June 1998 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) |
| Docket Number | No: 9800043/X4 |
To continue reading
Request your trial
2 cases
-
R v Hinks (Karen Maria)
...in Reg. v. Gomez [1993] A.C. 442. The law as explained in Lawrence and Gomez, and applied by the Court of Appeal in the present case ( Regina v. Hinks [2000] 2 Cr. App. Rep. 1) has attracted strong criticism from distinguished academic lawyers: see for example, J.C. Smith, [1993] Crim. L.R.......
-
Wheatley and Another v Commissioner of Police of the British Virgin Islands
...Directing itself in accordance with R v Lawrence (Alan) [1972] AC 626, R v Morris (David) [1984] AC 320, R v Gomez [1993] AC 442 and R v Hinks [2001] 2 AC 241, it concluded (para 37) that considerations of gain and loss were irrelevant to the decision whether there had been an appropria......
4 books & journal articles
-
The New Test for Dishonesty in Criminal Law—Lessons From the Courts of Equity?
...limit; and rejecting it124. Ibid 5125. Virgo (n 114) 20–21.126. Horder (n 100).127. Ibid.128. Ibid.129. Ibid 403.130. Ibid 404.131. [2000] 1 Cr App R 1.132. Ibid 2.133. Ibid 9. See also Lawrence v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [1972] AC 626 and R v Gomez [1993] AC 442 for earlierauthorit......
-
Dishonest Appropriation after Gomez and Hinks
...2 Cr App R 518 at 521, per Pill LJ.22 Contrast R v Kendick and Hopkins [1997] 2 Cr App R 524, CA where this assertionwas doubted.23 [2000] 1 Cr App R 1 at 9.Dishonest Appropriation after Gomez and The reasoning of the Court of Appeal therefore depends upon the disturb-ing acceptance that a ......
-
Restricting the Meaning of 'Appropriation' under the Theft Act 1968 - A Cool, Calm and Rational Approach to the Issue of 'Stealing' A Perfectly Valid Gift Lord Hobhouse's Dissent in R v Hinks [2000] UKHL 53, [2001] 2 AC 241
...to consider what the CLRC and the actual draftsman had intended. In his letter, Fiennes had 27 Above, n 1, at p 262, quoting Rose LJ [2000] 1 Cr App R 1 at 9. 28 [2000] 1 Cr App R 1 at 9. 29 Above, n 1, at p 247. 30 Above, n 3, at p 906. 31 Above, n 3, at p 905. See, also, Smith, JC, ‘The S......
-
‘A Drunken Consent is Still Consent’—Or is it? A Critical Analysis of the Law on a Drunken Consent to Sex following Bree
...Gardner and Shute, above n. 52.73 Unfortunately, discussing those reasons goes beyond the scope of this article.74 [1993] AC 442.75 [2000] 1 Cr App R 1.76 Cf. A. Bogg and J. Stanton-Ife, ‘Theft as Exploitation’ (2003) Legal Studies 402 at415–16.77 Given space limitations I am prevented from......