Gnango, Regina v: CACD 26 Jul 2010

The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder. He had engaged in a street battle using guns. A bullet from an opponent killed an innocent passer by. The court was asked whether the principles of joint venture and transferred malice could work together.
Held: The defendant’s appeal succeeded. A joint enterprise only existed in such a situation where the defendant could be said to have intended that he should be shot at by his opponent.
Thomas, Hooper, Hughes, Gross, Hedley LJJ
[2010] EWCA Crim 1691, [2010] WLR (D) 201, [2011] 1 WLR 1414, [2011] 1 All ER 153, [2010] 2 Cr App R 31
Bailii, WLRD
Criminal Law Act 1977 2(1), Offence Against the Person Act 1861 18
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedSalisbury’s case 1553
. .
CitedMansell and Herbert’s case 1555
During an attack by force on a house by a group of men who intended to take goods from the house, a woman was killed by a stone thrown by one of the group at another person.
Held: By a majority, they were all guilty of murder: ‘if two fight by . .
CitedRegina v Coney QBD 18-Mar-1882
A public prize-fight was unlawful. Spectators were tried at Berkshire County Quarter Sessions with common assault. The Chairman of Quarter Sessions directed the jury to convict the spectators of common assault on the basis that having stayed to . .
CitedRegina v Anderson; Regina v Morris CACD 1966
The court considered criminal liability under the joint enterprise rule where the principle took the action beyond what had been anticipated. Parker CJ said: ‘It seems to this court that to say that adventurers are guilty of manslaughter when one of . .
CitedNW, Regina v CACD 3-Mar-2010
nw_rCACD2010
The appellant, a schoolgirl and her friend were involved in an incident with police officers which rapidly escalated. She said that only she had been involved, but that it was wrong when others quite outside her control became involved on seeing the . .
CitedRahman and Others, Regina v HL 2-Jul-2008
The defendants appealed against their convictions for murder. None had themselves inflicted any violence, but were convicted as part of a joint enterprise. They said they had not known that the principal carried a knife. They said that the evidence . .
CitedBrown and Isaac v The State PC 29-Jan-2003
PC (Trinidad and Tobago) The defendants appealed their convictions for murder on a joint enterprise basis.
Held: If more than one person participates, in whatever capacity, in attacking a victim, each . .
CitedRegina v Powell (Anthony) and Another; Regina v English HL 30-Oct-1997
When the court looked at the issue of foreseeability of murder in an allegation of joint enterprise, there was no requirement to show intent by the secondary party. The forseeability of the risk of the principal committing the offence from the point . .

Cited by:
Appeal fromGnango, Regina v SC 14-Dec-2011
The prosecutor appealed against a successful appeal by the defendant against his conviction for murder. He and an opponent had engaged in a street battle using guns. His opponent had shot an innocent passer by. The court was now asked as to whether . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 26 February 2021; Ref: scu.421025