James Jaganath v The Queen
| Jurisdiction | Caribbean States |
| Judgment Date | 1968 |
| Year | 1968 |
| Date | 1968 |
| Court | Obsolete Court (Caribbean) |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
7 cases
-
Canice Lionel Appellant v The Queen Respondent [ECSC]
...or reasonable man, and the probable consequence". 48 After the learned Director of Public Prosecutions drew attention to the case James Jaganath v R. (1968) 11 W.I.R. 315 (followed in Hall v R. 24 W.I.R. 547), Mr. Foster invited us to find that Jaganath's case was wrongly decided and shoul......
-
Alexander Deterville Appellant v The Queen Respondent [ECSC]
...specific intent to cause death and that an intention to cause harm does not permit them to convict for murder; seeJaganath v The Queen (1968) 11 W.I.R. 315.8 This was the point that the Director conceded. 34 At a later point in the summing-up, after the judge had dealt with the issues of ju......
-
Rolle v R
...to interpret section 72 of the St Lucia Criminal Code, which is identical to our section 12(3) in the case of Jaganath v. the Queen, (1968) 11 W.I.R. 315. Chief Justice, A.M. Lewis delivered the judgment of the Court, and said at page 321: “ The presumption which arises under s. 72 (supra)......
-
Deterville v The Queen
...intent to cause death and that an intention to cause harm does not permit them to convict for murder; see Jaganath v. The Queen [(1968) 11 W.I.R. 315]. This was the point that the Director conceded. 34 At a later point in the summing-up, after the judge had dealt with the issues of justifia......
Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
-
Stare decisis and the development of Caribbean jurisprudence
...13 Burgees, supra, n.4 at 32. l4Ibid.,34. 15 This was established in Vierra v. Winchester (1966) 10 W.I.R. 400 and Wigley v. Bellot (1968) 11 W.I.R. 315, relying on the English case, Young v. BristolAeroplane Co. Ltd. [1944] 2 All E.R. 293. In Williams v. R. [Crim. Appeal No.59 of1972].Rees......