Thambiah v The Queen
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judgment Date | 1965 |
| Date | 1965 |
| Court | Privy Council |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
6 cases
-
R. v. Arason (R.H.) and Derosier (G.L.), (1992) 21 B.C.A.C. 20 (CA)
...consd. [para. 178]. R. v. Ryckman, Connors and Lynn (1981), 64 C.C.C.(2d) 192 (Ont. C.A.), consd. [paras. 180, 186]. Thambiah v. R., [1966] A.C. 37 (P.C.), refd to. [para. 180]. R. v. Paragon Computer Group Ltd. & Stesco International Ltd. (1985), 12 C.E.R. 185, refd to. [para. 180]. R.......
- Generale Bank Nederland NV (formerly Credit Lyonnais Bank Nederland NV) v Export Credits Guarantee Department
-
Generale Bank Nederland NV (formerly Credit Lyonnais Bank Nederland NV) v Export Credits Guarantee Department
...done is pursuant to and in furtherance of the common design to commit the tort. 109Thus it seems to me that in the case of Thambiah v R [1966] AC 37, the Appellant would probably have been liable as a joint tortfeasor with the actual forger of the cheque on the basis that what he did in ope......
-
DPP v Madden
...2 [1960] 1 Q.B. 129. 3 [1964] I.R. 325. 4 [1945] I.R. 339. 5 [1914] A.C. 545. 6 [1965] I.R. 142. 7 [1976] I.R. 325. 8 [1959] 1 Q.B. 11. 9 [1966] A.C. 37. 10 (1876) I.R. 10 C.L. 160. 11 [1936] I.R. 485. 12 [1967] 2 A.C. 160. 13 [1899] 2 I.R. 1, 18. 14 [1960] 1 Q.B. 129. 15 [1959] 1 Q.B. 11. ......
Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
-
THE DOCTRINE OF EXTENDED JOINT CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE: A 'WRONG TURN' IN AUSTRALIAN COMMON LAW.
...include: Canty v Ivers (1913) 19 Arg LR 403, 405; R v Russell [1933] VLR 59, 66 (Cussen ACJ); Blackmore (n 3) 377; Thambiah v The Queen [1966] AC 37, 46; R v Harding [1976] VR 129, 139 (Gowans (23) (1985) 156 CLR 473, 506. (24) Ibid 503. (25) The High Court in Johns regarded this presence r......
-
Recent Judicial Decisions
...The Judicial Committee of thePrivy Council thus explained the gist of the decision on this appealfrom the Supreme Court of Ceylon [1965] 3 All E.R. 661. Theappellant, who was unsuccessful in seeking to have his convictionupset, was charged with abetting another man, for whom he hadopened a ......