Accessorial Liability After Jogee

✍ Scribed by Beatrice Krebs (editor)

• Publisher: Hart Publishing
• Year: 2019
• Tongue: English
• Leaves: 295
• Category: Library

✦ Synopsis

In R v Jogee [2016] UKSC 8, the UK Supreme Court fundamentally changed the law of accessorial liability when it decided that the principles of joint enterprise had been misinterpreted for over thirty years. The Court abolished the head of liability known as parasitic accessory liability and replaced it with (re-stated) principles of assisting and encouraging. The judgment, widely reported and hailed as a ‘moment of genuine legal history’, sent shock waves around England and Wales as well as other common law jurisdictions which still operate ‘parasitic’ or ‘extended’ joint enterprise principles, and raised the hopes of hundreds of prisoners here and elsewhere who had been convicted under joint enterprise. This collection examines Jogee, subsequent Court of Appeal decisions, and case law from other jurisdictions that re-considered their own joint enterprise principles in the wake of Jogee. Its chapters are authored by scholars and practitioners, all experts in the area of complicity, but each bringing different experiences and views to bear on the issues under debate. The result is the first comprehensive analysis of the implications of Jogee. The present volume is not just a source of reference for academics and practitioners; its aim is more ambitious in that it seeks to chart the way forward and to suggest solutions to problems created by Jogee for criminal law theory and practice.

✦ Table of Contents

Acknowledgements
Table of Contents
List of Contributors
Introduction
1. Law Reform in the Supreme Court: The Abolition of Joint Enterprise
Liability?
I. Introduction
II. Interpreting Jogee: A First Attempt
III. Jogee: Facts; Law and Judicial Method
IV. Jogee in the Court of Appeal
V. Interpreting Jogee: A Second Attempt
VI. Some Post Jogee Legislative Proposals
2. What is the Theoretical Basis for Accomplice Liability?
I. The Theoretical Basis of Accomplice Liability
II. Causation
III. Semi-Causation and the Rules of Complicity
IV. Association, Agency, Authorisation and Assent
V. Authorisation and the Rules of Accessory Liability
VI. Conclusion: The Impact of the Basis of Liability on the Rules of Complicity
3. Jogee, Parasitic Accessory Liability and Conditional Intention
I. From PAL to Conditional Intention
II. Conditional Intention, Single Agents, and Multiple Agents
III. The Indifferent Weapon Supplier
IV. Disagreement between D and P About the Conditions
V. Conclusion
4. A Step Away from Liability – Withdrawal and Fundamental Difference
Post-Jogee
I. Introduction
II. Fundamental Difference
III. Withdrawal
IV. The Decision in Jogee
V. Fundamental Difference and Variation Post Jogee
VI. Withdrawal and Variation - Aspects of the Same Concept after Jogee?
VII. Establishing a Formula for Complicity
VIII. What Happens When an Element of Complicity is Missing?
IX. How Can Connection, and Withdrawal, be Described or Defined?
X. Conclusion
5. Vulnerability Theory and Joint Enterprise
I. Introduction
II. Vulnerability Theory
III. Vulnerability Theory and Joint Enterprise
IV. Conclusion
6. Joint Enterprise Murder is Dead – Long Live Joint Enterprise
Manslaughter?
I. Introduction
II. Shifting the Boundary between Murder and Manslaughter
III. Manslaughter by Unlawful and Dangerous Act in Multi-Party Settings
IV. Primary Liability: Co-perpetration of Unlawful Dangerous Acts?
V. Secondary Liability: Assistance or Encouragement of Unlawful Dangerous Acts
VI. Conclusion
7. The Queen v C, D and E: In the Supreme Court of Ruritania
I. Introduction
II. Facts
III. Law
IV. Applying the Law to the Facts
V. Model Jury Directions
8. Thinking Like an Accomplice: The Mens Rea for Complicity in US
and English Law after Rosemond and Jogee
I. The Basics: Introducing Rosemond and Jogee
II. How Does the Mens Rea for Complicity Carry Over to the Elements of the Underlying Crime?
III. The Main Difference between US and English Complicity Law and What to Do About it
9. Joint Criminal Confusion: Exploring the Merits and Demerits of Joint Enterprise Liability
I. Introduction
STEP I: Understanding Joint Enterprise
II. Joint Enterprise as Collateral Liability
III. The Elusive Concept of PAL
IV. Common Purpose: WWII Case Law
V. Joint Enterprise Liability in ICL
VI. Interim Conclusion
STEP II: Determining its Merit
VII. Inchoate Complicity
VIII. Merits of Joint Enterprise
STEP III: Redrawing Boundaries
IX. Reappraising the Foresight-Test
X. Concluding Observations
10. Extended Joint Criminal Enterprise – ‘Top-down’ or ‘Bottom-up’ Legal Reasoning?
I. A Brief Historical Overview of Complicity
II. Present Day Common Law Principles Regarding Complicity
III. The Authorities
IV. Analysis
11. Jogee – How Did it Happen?
I. Introduction
II. The Trial
III. The Court of Appeal
IV. Seeking Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court
V. The Interveners
VI. Drafting Submissions
VII. Listing
VIII. Identifying the Issues
IX. The Hand Down
X. The Retrial
XI. How Did Parasitic Accessorial Liability Happen?
XII. The Substantial Injustice Test
XIII. Conclusion
Index