Law Cases > Criminal Law Cases > Accessories Cases

R v Calhaem

[1985] QB 808

Case summary last updated at 11/01/2020 14:24 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team.

Judgement for the case R v Calhaem

D paid Z to murder V. When Z was in V’s home, he decided not to murder V, but suddenly went berserk and did it. D was convicted of counselling Z and CA dismissed her appeal on the grounds that “counsel” did not require a causal connection. On the basis of Widgery’s “ordinary meaning” rule, the word “counsel” implies no causal connection an simply means “authorise” or “advise” etc

Have you seen Oxbridge Notes' best Criminal Law study materials?

Our law notes have been a popular underground sensation for 10 years:

Written by Oxford & Cambridge prize-winning graduates
Includes copious adademic commentary in summary form
Concise structure relating cases and statutes into an easy-to-remember whole
Covers all major cases for LLB exams
Satisfaction guaranteed refund policy
Recently updated

Criminal Law Notes >>

Criminal Law Notes