Week 8 Tutorial This tutorial consists of the following parts: · Part 1 - Case note exercise: R v Angus [2000] QCA 29 Part 2 - Problem solving exercise . Pre-tutorial preparation 1. You will need to read the case of R v Angus [2000] QCA 29 before attending this tutorial. This case is very short (five pages). 2. Review the annotations to Carter's Criminal Code for the property offences discussed in the week 7 lecture. Carefully read the annotations related to s 391 and s 398.
Part 1 - Case note exercise Answer the following questions as a way of formulating a case note. · Who was the appellant? Christopher Carl Angus · What was the offence/s? Stealing Under sections: 391(1)ti 391(2)(a)ti 391(6) . Which court was the trial held in? The appeal was held in the Queensland Court of Appeal. The originating court was the District Court of Maroochydore. · Who were the justices who heard the appeal? McMurdo Pti McPherson JAti Pincus JA . What were the material facts of the case? o appellant was charged with stealing under s391 of the code o Appellant hired out 2 game consoles on 15th of june based on the fact that they would be returned the next day (16th june) o The store attempted to contact the appellant to have the chattels returned o However the person that called on behalf of the store could not recall who had answered the call o There was evidence to suggest that the appellant had moved homes. · What are the elements of a stealing offence? 1. Person 2. Fraudulently takes / converts 3. Something capable of being stolen 4. With intent to deprive the owner of that thing · What were the grounds of appeal? o Whether there was reasonably open to the jury to be satisfied that there was a fraudulent taking or fraudulent conversionti with the requisite intention A contention was made as the evidence did not sufficiently prove the identity of the person who hired the 4 chattels. · What was the decision of the Queensland Court of Appeal? The decision was to set aside the conviction and to enter a verdict of acquittal . What was the ratio of the case? The answer is that the Code requires not just passive possession, but an act of conversion; that must be or include a physical dealing with the goods and the dealing must in my opinion be such as to be inconsistent with the true owner's rights. Leaving a borrowed book on a shelf is not an act of conversion, no matter how long the book stays there.
Part 2 - Problem solving exercise Peter operates a small landscaping business. When business was hectic in May of this yearti he needed to hire some extra equipment to keep up with his workload. To that endti he hired a mini excavatorti a large box-trailerti and a high-pressure hose from Hire 'n Go Pty Ltd. Because he is a very