top of page
Pascoe Criminal Law Logo
  • Writer's pictureShaun Pascoe

Property Offences: Robbery

Updated: Oct 27, 2023

We provide an overview of the offence of Robbery in Victoria and discuss what the prosecution must prove defences and sentencing outcomes.

Table of Contents


What The Prosecution Must Prove

The offence combines elements of theft and assault.

The Elements

  • a person commits the offence of theft;

- appropriation of property belonging to another

- with the intention of permanently depriving that person of their property

- person acted dishonestly, and without lawful excuse

  • immediately before the theft or at the time of doing so and in order to do so

  • uses force on any person; or

  • or seeks to put any person in fear that he or another person will be then and there subjected to force


The accused will have “appropriated” property if she or he:

  • assumed any of the rights of the owner (s. 73(4) of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic); and

  • adversely interfered with or usurped the owner's rights in some way (Roffel v. R [1985] VR 511).


“Property” is defined to include “money and all other property real or personal including things in action and other tangible property” (Crimes Act 1958 s71(1)). A debt may also amount to property (R v Lloyd [1985] QB 829.

'Belonging to another'

Property “belongs” to anyone who has possession or control of it, or who has any other proprietary right or interest in it (Crimes Act 1958 s71(2)). These interests include legal and equitable proprietary interests (R v Clowes (No 2) [1994] 2 All ER 316).

'Intention to permanently deprive'

The accused must have already formed the intention to permanently deprive the owner of the property at the time of the appropriation (R v Easom [1971] 2 QB 315; Sharp v McCormick [1986] VR 869).

'Accused acted dishonestly'

At common law, dishonesty means an accused acted without any claim of legal right (R v Salvo [1980] VR 401; R v Bonollo [1981] VR 633 and R v Brow [1981] VR 783).

'Dishonesty' is defined under s. 73(2) of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic). This definition also provides that a person's appropriation is not to be regarded as dishonest if the person believed that:

i) She or he had a legal right to deprive the owner of the property; or

ii) The owner would have consented to the appropriation if s/he had known of it and the circumstances surrounding it; or

iii) The owner could not be discovered by taking reasonable steps.

Use of force

The minimum degree of force that must be applied is not defined under the Crimes Act or at common law (Hood v. R [2000] WASCA 98).

Fear of force

The fear of force must be sufficient to cause intimidation (R v. Butcher [1986] VR 43.

Seeking to put the victim in fear of force

It is not necessary to prove that the victim was in fact in fear when the threat was made. What must be proven by the prosecution is that an accused intended to put the victim in fear (R v. Fraser (1999) 109 A Crim R 460).

Immediately before or at the time

The prosecution must prove that the use of force occurred immediately before or at the time of the taking of property.

The Maximum Penalty for the Offence of Robbery

Under section 75(2) of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic), the maximum penalty for the offence of Robbery is 15 years.

Despite the high maximum penalty for this indictable offence, robbery may be heard and determined in the Magistrates' Court (see schedule 2 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2009 (Vic)) provided the property value alleged in the robbery does not exceed $100,000.

Defences to Robbery

The prosecution must prove each and every element described above to successfully prosecute an accused of robbery. Consequently, a defence to robbery may arise from a factual dispute as to any of the elements described above. Other defences including mental impairment, duress/necessity, or a honest and reasonable belief as to a claim of right over the property, may also be argued depending upon the particular circumstances of the case.

Sentencing Outcomes

The seriousness of the offence can vary greatly depending upon the degree of violence used to effect the theft, the value of the property; whether the victim sustained any injuries.

Matters personal to the accused also play a role in sentencing (their age, criminal history).

As a general guide the Sentencing Advisory Council published the sentencing outcomes for the offence of robbery during the period 1 July 2016 - 30 June 2019 when the offence was heard in the Magistrates' Court:

What are the Court Events for an Allegation of Robbery?

Robbery allegations proceed through the following stages:

  • Mention (and case conference negotiations)

  • Contest mention - where an allegation of assault cannot be finalised, and an accused may seek a sentence indication from the presiding Magistrate.

  • Contested hearing - where matter has not been resolved at a contest mention and proceeds as a not guilty plea. If a Magistrate finds the allegation(s) have not been proven beyond reasonable doubt, the charge(s) are dismissed. Conversely, if the allegation is proven, the Magistrate will impose a sentence (as described above).

Get Advice and Prepare Early

If you are facing an allegation of robbery, or any criminal offence, call our office to receive expert advice about your situation. Contact us to organise a case assessment.


Os comentários foram desativados.

Call us for urgent expert advice (03) 9668 7600

bottom of page