R v Susak

[1999] NTSC 61

Supreme Court of the Northern Territory

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Attempt
3. › Distinction between preparation and attempt
4. › Proximity test
5. › Whether acts sufficiently proximate to commission of offence
6. › Whether accused had reached location where crime was to be committed
7. › Criminal Code (NT), s 4
1. Criminal Law
2. › Attempt
3. › Armed robbery
4. › Accused armed with knife approaching locked premises
5. › Whether case to answer
6. › No case submission at close of Crown case
1. Criminal Law
2. › Attempt
3. › Tests for determining attempt
4. › Proximity test preferred over 'if not interrupted' test
5. › Criminal Code (NT), s 4

Quick Take

Where an accused has not gained entry to the premises where the intended offence was to be committed and has not reached the location where the crime was to be carried out, the conduct remains mere preparation and does not constitute an attempt under s 4 of the Criminal Code (NT), even where the accused was armed and had expressed an intention to rob. The 'if not interrupted' test is rejected as an inappropriate and unacceptably wide basis for determining criminal attempt.