• Refine Query
  • Source
  • Publication year
  • to
  • Language
  • 2
  • Tagged with
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • 2
  • About
  • The Global ETD Search service is a free service for researchers to find electronic theses and dissertations. This service is provided by the Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations.
    Our metadata is collected from universities around the world. If you manage a university/consortium/country archive and want to be added, details can be found on the NDLTD website.
1

The nature of association and dissociation for common purpose liability

Makiwane, Paterson Nkosemntu 11 1900 (has links)
Since the pre-requisites for common-purpose liability where there was no prior agreement were laid down in S V Mgedezi 1989 (1) SA 687 (A), the appellate division has moved to resolve related controversial issues. These include the question whether a joiner-in is a perpetrator or accomplice, and whether he should be convicted of murder or attempted murder. It is the question of dissociation which has remained elusive. Courts accept that a person should only be criminally liable when his dissociation from a common purpose takes place after the commencement of execution stage is reached. My submission is that whether one dissociates himself should be a question of fact, to be determined according to the circumstances of each case. Such determination should pay close attention to the doctrine of proximity. Where a person played a minor role, or acted under the influence of a dominant partner, this should be reflected in the punishment imposed. / Criminal & Procedural Law / LL.M. (Criminal & Procedural Law)
2

The nature of association and dissociation for common purpose liability

Makiwane, Paterson Nkosemntu 11 1900 (has links)
Since the pre-requisites for common-purpose liability where there was no prior agreement were laid down in S V Mgedezi 1989 (1) SA 687 (A), the appellate division has moved to resolve related controversial issues. These include the question whether a joiner-in is a perpetrator or accomplice, and whether he should be convicted of murder or attempted murder. It is the question of dissociation which has remained elusive. Courts accept that a person should only be criminally liable when his dissociation from a common purpose takes place after the commencement of execution stage is reached. My submission is that whether one dissociates himself should be a question of fact, to be determined according to the circumstances of each case. Such determination should pay close attention to the doctrine of proximity. Where a person played a minor role, or acted under the influence of a dominant partner, this should be reflected in the punishment imposed. / Criminal and Procedural Law / LL.M. (Criminal & Procedural Law)

Page generated in 0.137 seconds