The Supreme Court decision in Ivey v Genting Casinos rejected the two-stage test for dishonesty set out in R v Ghosh and replaced it with a single, objective test which transcends both criminal and civil law. This article asks whether it was correct to create a single test for dishonesty and in doing so, what role will subjectivity now play in the criminal law’s application of what is considered dishonest behaviour. Historically, the civil courts have beset with confusion as to the role of subjectivity in the test for dishonesty in the light of Royal Brunei Airlines v Tan. The author will consider whether lessons can be learned from the civil courts and whether similar problems will trouble criminal law, particularly in the light of criticism of the Ivey test and a preference, by some, for subjectivity to play a greater role in criminal liability for theft and other dishonesty offences.

中文翻译：

---

刑法失信新标准——衡平法院的教训？

最高法院在 Ivey v Genting Casinos 案中的裁决驳回了 R v Ghosh 案中对不诚实行为的两阶段测试，取而代之的是超越刑法和民法的单一客观测试。本文询问为不诚实行为创建单一测试是否正确，在此过程中，主观性现在在刑法适用于被视为不诚实行为的行为中将发挥什么作用。从历史上看，民事法庭一直对主观性在文莱皇家航空公司诉 Tan 案中的不诚实测试中的作用感到困惑。作者将考虑是否可以从民事法庭中吸取教训，以及类似的问题是否会困扰刑法，特别是考虑到对 Ivey 测试的批评和一些人的偏好，