Shuib, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 1333 (23 October 2024)

Shuib, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 1333 (23 October 2024)

The judge's answers to the jury's questions were correct in law; a threat of violence or force is sufficient for robbery and does not require the use or presence of a weapon. The appellant's argument that the absence of a weapon precluded conviction was not supported by the law or the way the case was put at trial.

Citation
[2024] EWCA Crim 1333
Parties
Respondent: Rex; Appellant: Rahil Shuib
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Robbery, Jury Directions, Appeal Against Conviction, Use or Threat of Force, Weapons in Robbery
Criminal Law Robbery Jury Directions Appeal Against Conviction Use or Threat of Force Weapons in Robbery

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Respondent

Rahil Shuib

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge's answers to jury questions on the elements of robbery were legally correct
  2. 2 Whether the absence of a weapon precluded a conviction for robbery given the way the Crown put its case
  3. 3 Whether the judge should have directed the jury that a finding of no weapon required acquittal on robbery

Ratio Decidendi

The judge's answers to the jury's questions were correct in law; a threat of violence or force is sufficient for robbery and does not require the use or presence of a weapon. The appellant's argument that the absence of a weapon precluded conviction was not supported by the law or the way the case was put at trial.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed