“Supreme Court overrules joint enterprise doctrine requiring foresight of collateral crime”
Jogee encouraged his friend Hirsi to attack the victim with a knife, shouting encouragement from outside while Hirsi fatally stabbed the victim through a window. Both were convicted of murder under joint enterprise principles.
Whether the established doctrine of parasitic accessory liability, requiring only foresight of the collateral crime, correctly stated the law for joint enterprise convictions.
The doctrine of parasitic accessory liability based on foresight alone was wrong in law. Secondary parties must intend to assist or encourage the principal's crime - foresight is evidence of intent but not sufficient mens rea itself.
This landmark decision corrected decades of joint enterprise law and raised the threshold for secondary liability, potentially affecting numerous past convictions based solely on foresight.
You're reading the free summary of R v Jogee. Create a free account to unlock the full reasoning, the cited authorities and the verbatim judgment — plus structured briefs for 412,000+ UK judgments.
No card required. Free forever.
OSCOLA Citation
R v Jogee [2016] UKSC 8, [2017] AC 387
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Falls back to Google for old citations BAILII catalogues separately
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.