R v Martin

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Date1867
CourtCourt for Crown Cases Reserved
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
12 cases
  • R v Wilson (Clarence) ; R v Edward John Jenkins ; R v Ronald Patrick Jenkins
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 18 February 1983
    ...ago as 1861 and, therefore, there is a whole body of authority arising from prosecutions under section 20. In 1881, there was the case of R v. Martin (1881) 8 Q.B. 54. The facts of that case are these: "Shortly before the conclusion of a performance at a theatre, M.," the accused, "with the......
  • R v King (David)
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 28 November 1986
    ... ... 16 Moreover, this approach is in accordance with the decision of the Court for Crown Cases Reserved in R. v. Martin, (1867), 1 CCR 56, where it was held that a conviction for obtaining a chattel by false pretences was good, although the chattel was not in existence at the time that the pretence was made, provided the subsequent delivery of the chattel was directly connected with the false pretence. At p.60 ... ...
  • R v Mandair
    • United Kingdom
    • House of Lords
    • 19 May 1994
  • R v Wilson (Clarence) ; R v Edward John Jenkins ; R v Ronald Patrick Jenkins
    • United Kingdom
    • House of Lords
    • 13 October 1983
    ...…". See page 461. 30This conclusion was reached after careful consideration of English authorities such as Taylor (1861) L.R. 1 C.C.R. 194, Martin (1881) 8 Q.B.D. 54, Clarence (1888) 22 Q.B.D. 23, Halliday (1889) 6 T.L.R. 109. My Lords, it would be idle to pretend that these cases are whol......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • THE DOCTRINE OF EXTENDED JOINT CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE: A 'WRONG TURN' IN AUSTRALIAN COMMON LAW.
    • Australia
    • Melbourne University Law Review Vol. 41 No. 3, April 2018
    • 1 April 2018
    ...in O (A Child) v Rhodes [2016] AC 219, 243 [43]-[45], 247 [61]-[62] (Baroness Hale DPSC and Lord Toulson JSC). (40) R v Martin (1881) 8 QBD 54, (41) See, eg, R v Ryan (1853) 1 Legge 797, 798; Randell v South Australian Insurance Co (1868) 2 SALR 172. For a relaxed application of the princip......

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