R v Prince

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
CourtDivisional Court
Year1865
Date1865

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
42 cases
  • C v Ireland
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 12 June 2005
    ...be found in a line of authorities running from 112 R. v. Forbes 113 (1865) 10 Cox C .C. 362, and including 114 R. v. Prince 115 (1875) L.R. 2 C.C.R. 154 ; 116 R. v. Maxwell 117 (1909) 2 Cr. App. R. 26 ; 118 R. v. Mark 119 [1961] Crim. L.R. 173 ; Kenlin v. Gardiner [1967] 2 Q.B. 510; 120 R. ......
  • R v Sutton
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal
    • Invalid date
  • R v Brown (Raymond Andrew)
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 13 July 1984
    ...knowledge or belief as to whether she is already a prostitute is irrelevant. 15 He draws our attention in this respect to the authority of R. v. Prince (1875) 2 Crown Cases Reserved 154. It was a case, so far as one can make out, that was heard before all the Judges. That was a charge of un......
  • R v Tegerdine
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 5 April 1982
    ...conclusion. Because of this conflict of judicial opinion the full Court for the Consideration of Crown Cases Reserved assembled in Reg. v. Prince, L.R. 2 C.C.R. 154. It is interesting to note that the presiding judge was Cockburn C.J., whose decision in Tinkler's case gave rise to the conf......
  • Get Started for Free
3 books & journal articles
  • Strict Criminal Liability: A Violation of the Convention?
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage Journal of Criminal Law, The No. 70-6, December 2006
    • 1 December 2006
    ...ER 963, CA.21 International Transport Roth GmbH and Others v Secretary of State for the HomeDepartment [2003] QB 728, CA.22 R vPrince (1875) LR 2 CCR 154. cf. B (A Minor) vDPP [2000] 2 AC 428, HL andR vK [2001] 3 All ER 897.The Journal of Criminal regularly,23 and inf‌lation24. The categori......
  • Conspiracy: Mens Rea
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage Journal of Criminal Law, The No. 69-6, December 2005
    • 1 December 2005
    ...part of the elements for the full offence.This proposition can be exemplified by two examples. First, consider thefacts in R v Prince (1875) LR 2 CCR 154, involving the offence ofabduction of a minor (a strict liability crime), but where D legitimatelybelieved the girl to be over 16. Suppos......
  • Taking and Driving Away Motor Vehicles, and Mens Rea
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage Journal of Criminal Law, The No. 27-2, April 1963
    • 1 April 1963
    ...offences which are personal intheir nature and are not inthesame class as regards the pro-tection of public welfare, viz. R. v. Prince,L.R.2C.C.R. 154(abduction), R. v. Wheat (1921) 2K.B.II9(bigamy) and R. v.Leinster (Duke01)(1924) IK.B.3II(undischarged bankruptobtaining credit).However, th......