Inchoate Offences Case Law
⚖️ Inchoate Offences Overview
Three main types of inchoate offences:
Attempt (trying but failing to commit a crime)
Conspiracy (agreement between two or more people to commit a crime)
Solicitation (encouraging or requesting another person to commit a crime)
The law aims to punish dangerous intentions and steps toward criminal acts.
📚 Important Inchoate Offences Cases
1. R v. Shivpuri (1986)
Facts:
Shivpuri believed he was smuggling drugs, but the package contained harmless substances.
Held:
Court overruled a previous case and held that attempts to commit impossible crimes are still punishable if the defendant believed the crime was possible.
Significance:
Expanded the attempt offence to include “impossible attempts.”
2. R v. White (1910)
Facts:
White attempted to poison his mother but she died of an unrelated cause.
Held:
Convicted of attempted murder since he had the intention and took steps, even though the victim died from something else.
Significance:
Clarified the principle that attempt is judged on intention and actions, not success.
3. R v. Walker and Hayles (1990)
Facts:
Two defendants agreed to commit burglary (conspiracy). The police intervened before the crime was carried out.
Held:
They were guilty of conspiracy as the agreement was sufficient, even if no steps had been taken.
Significance:
Confirmed conspiracy as an offence based on agreement alone.
4. R v. Gullefer (1990)
Facts:
Gullefer tried to stop a dog race to reclaim a bet. His attempt was interrupted before committing theft.
Held:
The court ruled that an attempt requires more than preparation — a clear act towards committing the offence.
Significance:
Defined the boundary between preparation and attempt.
5. R v. Donnelly (1990)
Facts:
Donnelly conspired to commit robbery but never carried out the plan.
Held:
Convicted of conspiracy as the crime agreement sufficed.
Significance:
Reinforced conspiracy liability before the crime happens.
6. R v. Gilmour (1986)
Facts:
Gilmour was charged with solicitation for encouraging others to commit burglary.
Held:
Court held solicitation involves encouraging or persuading another person to commit a crime, punishable regardless of whether the crime happens.
Significance:
Defined the boundaries of solicitation.
🔁 Summary Table
| Case | Year | Offence | Outcome | Legal Principle |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| R v. Shivpuri | 1986 | Attempt | Guilty (impossible attempt) | Attempts punishable despite impossibility |
| R v. White | 1910 | Attempt | Guilty (attempted murder) | Intention + act enough, success not needed |
| R v. Walker & Hayles | 1990 | Conspiracy | Guilty | Agreement alone suffices for conspiracy |
| R v. Gullefer | 1990 | Attempt | Not guilty (only preparation) | Attempt requires clear step toward crime |
| R v. Donnelly | 1990 | Conspiracy | Guilty | Conspiracy punishable even if crime not done |
| R v. Gilmour | 1986 | Solicitation | Guilty | Encouraging crime punishable regardless of outcome |
💡 Key Takeaways
Attempt: Must go beyond preparation; belief in possibility is enough (Shivpuri).
Conspiracy: Agreement alone creates liability (Walker, Donnelly).
Solicitation: Encouragement is punishable, even if crime not committed (Gilmour).
Criminal liability applies even when the crime is impossible or unsuccessful (White, Shivpuri).
RELATED Blog
0 comments