This Supreme Court case established a new test for dishonesty in criminal law, overruling the subjective element of the Ghosh test. The case arose from a professional gambler's civil claim against a casino after being accused of cheating at baccarat through edge-sorting.

R v Ghosh established the test for dishonesty in criminal law, requiring both objective and subjective elements. The case created a two-stage test that was fundamental to determining dishonesty in fraud and theft cases until the Supreme Court replaced its subjective second limb with a wholly objective test in Ivey v Genting Casinos [2017] UKSC 67.

A key case establishing the limitations of transferred malice where the type of harm differs from that intended. The defendant threw a stone intending to hit people but broke a window instead.

This case established the fundamental test for the insanity defence in English criminal law. The defendant shot the Prime Minister's secretary believing he was being persecuted by the government.

Two shipwrecked sailors killed and ate their teenage cabin boy to survive at sea, then were charged with murder upon rescue. The court rejected the defence of necessity, establishing that necessity cannot justify taking an innocent life.

A Victorian case where a man deceived a woman into having sexual intercourse by pretending it was a medical procedure. The court held that deception as to the nature of the act vitiates consent.

R v Pittwood established that a person can be criminally liable for omissions where they have undertaken a duty of care. A railway gatekeeper who failed to close level crossing gates, resulting in a fatal collision, was convicted of manslaughter despite not having actively caused the death.

R v White established that causation in criminal law requires the defendant's act to be a factual cause of the prohibited result. White attempted to poison his mother but she died of a heart attack before the poison could take effect, breaking the chain of causation and resulting in conviction only for attempt.

R v Latimer established the doctrine of transferred malice in criminal law, where a defendant's intention to harm one person can be transferred to make them liable for actually harming another person. This case is fundamental to understanding how criminal intent operates when the actual victim differs from the intended victim.

R v Gibbins and Proctor established that a person can be criminally liable for murder by omission where they have a duty to act but fail to do so. The case involved a father and his partner who failed to feed the father's child, resulting in the child's death from starvation.

The House of Lords established the fundamental principles governing intoxication as a defence in criminal law, distinguishing between crimes of specific and basic intent and setting rules for when intoxication can negate mens rea.

Steane, a British actor, made propaganda broadcasts for Germany during WWII to protect his family from a concentration camp. The Court of Appeal held that for the offence of doing acts likely to assist the enemy with intent to assist the enemy, the prosecution must prove the accused intended to assist the enemy, not merely that he intended to do the acts.

A foundational case establishing the test for gross negligence manslaughter, requiring negligence so gross that it amounts to a crime and merits criminal punishment rather than mere civil liability.

Woolmington v DPP established the fundamental principle that the prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt in criminal cases. The case overturned the previous rule that required defendants to prove their innocence when claiming self-defence in murder cases.

Case establishing that actus reus can be satisfied by an omission where there is a legal duty to act. The defendant's failure to fulfil a statutory duty constituted the physical element of the offence.

Court of Appeal case establishing that a victim's unreasonable reaction can break the chain of causation if it is unforeseeable and unreasonable.

This case established that a duty of care in criminal law can arise from voluntary assumption of responsibility for a vulnerable person. Stone and Dobinson were convicted of manslaughter after Stone's sister died from malnutrition while living in their care, despite their failure to seek adequate medical help.

Established that a continuing act can satisfy the actus reus and mens rea requirements for assault, even if formed at different times. The defendant accidentally drove onto a police officer's foot but then refused to move when asked.

R v Miller established that criminal liability can arise from omission where a defendant creates a dangerous situation and fails to take reasonable steps to counteract it. This landmark case extended the scope of actus reus beyond positive acts to include failures to act in specific circumstances.

Court of Appeal held that partial entry can constitute entry for burglary purposes, even when the defendant becomes trapped and cannot complete the intended theft.

R v Pagett established the principles of factual causation in criminal law where the defendant used his pregnant girlfriend as a human shield during a shootout with police, resulting in her death from police gunfire. The case clarified that a defendant can be held criminally responsible for consequences of their actions even when an intervening act by a third party directly causes the harm.

The defendant was convicted as a secondary party to robbery. The Court of Appeal held that mere presence at the scene of a crime, even with knowledge that an offence is being committed, is insufficient to establish secondary liability. There must be evidence of encouragement or assistance to the principal offender.

R v Morris established the definition of theft under the Theft Act 1968, holding that any assumption of any right of the owner constitutes appropriation. The case clarified that switching price labels in a shop amounts to theft even before leaving the premises, as it represents an unauthorized assumption of the owner's rights.