Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Seminar 7.2 Concurrence

    Uploaded by

    Azizul Kirosaki
    49 views7 pages
    This document discusses the principle of concurrence, where the actus reus (AR) and mens rea (MR) of a crime must coincide. It examines different approaches courts have taken when AR and MR do not perfectly align, such as stretching the definition of a single transaction or using causation. The single transaction approach considers multiple acts as one transaction if the MR formed before the exact AR. The causation approach requires an earlier AR to substantially cause the result for liability. The moral congruence approach looks at whether later acts furthered the wrongdoing of earlier acts.

    Original Description:

    Singapore Criminal Law

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document discusses the principle of concurrence, where the actus reus (AR) and mens rea (MR) of a crime must coincide. It examines different approaches courts have taken when AR and MR do not perfectly align, such as stretching the definition of a single transaction or using causation. The single transaction approach considers multiple acts as one transaction if the MR formed before the exact AR. The causation approach requires an earlier AR to substantially cause the result for liability. The moral congruence approach looks at whether later acts furthered the wrongdoing of earlier acts.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    49 views7 pages

    Seminar 7.2 Concurrence

    Uploaded by

    Azizul Kirosaki
    This document discusses the principle of concurrence, where the actus reus (AR) and mens rea (MR) of a crime must coincide. It examines different approaches courts have taken when AR and MR do not perfectly align, such as stretching the definition of a single transaction or using causation. The single transaction approach considers multiple acts as one transaction if the MR formed before the exact AR. The causation approach requires an earlier AR to substantially cause the result for liability. The moral congruence approach looks at whether later acts furthered the wrongdoing of earlier acts.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 7

    Concurrence of AR and MR

    Seminar 7.b

    Principle of concurrence (or contemporaneity): AR and MR of an offence must not only exist but must also coincide Why? No crime without culpability of the mind, no crime based on thoughts alone Penal Code silent; reference to case law developments elsewhere
    2

    Difficult scenarios

    AR comes before MR
    R v Miller Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commissioner

    MR comes before AR
    Muhammad Radi v PP Shaiful Edham bin Adam v PP

    Different approaches

    Single transaction approach Causation approach Moral congruence approach

    Single transaction approach

    Stretch out the AR so it includes MR When MR before exact AR


    Thabo Meli Shaiful Edham

    When AR before MR formed


    Fagan

    How do you decide what forms the same transaction?


    5

    Causation approach

    A did several ARs, MR coincides with earlier AR


    Establish AR as one of the causes Only if AR is substantial enough to lead to death

    Shaiful Edham
    Neck wounds operating, substantial cause

    Problems associated with causation


    6

    Moral congruence

    Series of ARs were later series done to further wrongdoing? Mohd Radi
    Later AR of hiding cannot be separated from earlier AR of hitting ---- one transaction

    Cf. if later AR was of different character R v Le Brun


    Held: difference between AR designed to help or to further
    7

    You might also like