Accessibility navigation


Accessory liability: persisting in error (case comment)

Krebs, B. (2017) Accessory liability: persisting in error (case comment). Cambridge Law Journal, 76 (1). pp. 7-11. ISSN 1469-2139

[img]
Preview
Text - Accepted Version
· Please see our End User Agreement before downloading.

93kB

It is advisable to refer to the publisher's version if you intend to cite from this work. See Guidance on citing.

To link to this item DOI: 10.1017/S0008197317000150

Abstract/Summary

The paper examines the recent decision in Miller v The Queen by the High Court of Australia. The Court declined to follow the Privy Council and UK Supreme Court (UKSC) in abolishing the doctrine of extended joint criminal enterprise, but as the paper argues the reasons given by the majority do little more than reassert well-rehearsed arguments in favour of ‘joint enterprise’ doctrine. The decision appears policy-based rather than principled. The paper suggests that the dissenting opinion makes for a much more convincing argument.

Item Type:Article
Refereed:No
Divisions:Faculty of Arts, Humanities and Social Science > School of Law
ID Code:72949
Publisher:Cambridge University Press

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

University Staff: Request a correction | Centaur Editors: Update this record

Page navigation