The court considered cases referred to it by the Criminal Cases Review Commission. Each related to convictions for sexual assaults on children in care. New material including several untrue allegations by the complainants suggested that the convictions might be unsafe. Held: The evidence of other similar allegations and history of unreliability made the convictions safe. … Continue reading Siddall and Brooke, Regina v: CACD 15 Jun 2006
The defendants had been convicted on evidence obtained from them by inspectors with statutory powers to require answers on pain of conviction. Subsequently the law changed to find such activity an infringement of a defendant’s human rights. Held: There was no requirement for a court to implement a Human Rights Court decision retrospectively to require … Continue reading Regina v Lyons, Parnes, Ronson, Saunders: HL 15 Nov 2002
The defendants purported to serve a notice under Rule 24A(1) of the Crown Court Rules 1982 of an intention to apply for a hearing in camera of their application that the trial be stopped as an abuse of process. Held: ‘This is not a formal judgment. The Court is of the opinion, for reasons which … Continue reading Regina v Guardian Newspapers Ltd: CACD 15 Sep 1998
The company appealed against the sentence imposed on a finding that it was in breach of the 2010 Regulations. It sought to bring new evidence. Held: In sentencing appeals the court will scrutinise intensely any application to give a factual explanation that was not before the sentencing court. The terms of the Criminal Practice Direction … Continue reading Thames Water Utilities Ltd, Regina v: CACD 3 Jun 2015
Good Reason to Pursue Second Appeal The appellants had been convicted of fraud against the Post Office. The Criminal Cases Review Commission referred their convictions on two grounds, namely abuse of process for the inability to provide a fair trial, and that the trial was an affront to the conscience of the court. The first … Continue reading Hamilton and Others v Post Office Ltd: CACD 15 Jan 2021
Exercise of Ministerial Discretion The Minister had power to direct an investigation in respect of any complaint as to the operation of any marketing scheme for agricultural produce. Milk producers complained about the price paid by the milk marketing board for their milk when compared with prices paid to producers in other regions. The Minister … Continue reading Padfield v Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food: HL 14 Feb 1968
The court had allowed an appeal against sentence; but later the same day the defendant was brought back because the court thought that he had not been frank in answering questions about another offence. Held: The court set aside its original judgment and directed a rehearing, at which it was held that there was indeed … Continue reading Regina v Cross (Patrick): CACD 1973
These two appeals raised issues as to the evidence or other information which a sentencing court and this court should receive and take into account when the issue of dangerousness is being considered for the purposes of imprisonment for public protection under the 2003 Act. Held: The exception allowing such evidence is strictly limited. It … Continue reading Beesley and Another, Regina v: CACD 18 Apr 2011
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder saying that at the time of the offence he suffered a paranoid psychotic illness which would have substantially impaired his mental responsibility for his acts. He was not regarded as insane as defined by the M’Naghton rules. He had been advised that he might have a defence … Continue reading Regina v Weekes: CACD 18 Feb 1999
The appellant, an Iraqi national had arrived in 2000 as a child, and stayed unlawfully after failure of his asylum claim. He was convicted twice of drugs offences. On release he was considered a low risk of re-offending. He had been in a serious relationship with an English woman since 2005. However the Home Secretary … Continue reading Hesham Ali (Iraq) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 16 Nov 2016
The defendant appealed against her conviction for aggravated vehicle taking. She was found near the scene of a road traffic accident involving a stolen car, and her fingerprint on an inside rear window. She submitted that the officers had asked as to her involvement at a time when she was already a suspect, and that … Continue reading Hughes v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 12 Oct 2009
The Austrian District and Regional Real Property Transactions Commission refused to approve the sale of a number of plots of land. The applicant challenged the refusal alleging bias and contending that his article 6 rights were violated for that reason. The Austrian statute provided that the refusal of approval rendered the sale null and void. … Continue reading Ringeisen v Austria: ECHR 16 Jul 1971
The prisoners appealed the review of the recommended minimum terms they must serve on that term being reviewed by the court, saying that the court should have made allowance for the exceptional progress to rehabilitation made in prison. Held: If the evidence is in essence fresh information about the offender, a court will normally not … Continue reading Caines, Regina v, Regina v Roberts: CACD 23 Nov 2006
The prosecutor applied for an order to require the magistrates to state a case. He faced a charge of driving with excess alcohol. He pleaded not guilty. There were several adjournments, and a considerable delay. At the trial, and with no forewarning, the defence requested the prosecution to prove service of the certificate of analysis. … Continue reading Director of Public Prosecutions, Regina (on the Application of) v Chorley Justices and Forrest: Admn 8 Jun 2006
Land had been given to a football club under a trust for its exclusive use as such. That land was sold and a new ground acquired and a stadium built, but the land was subject to restrictive covenenats limiting its use to sports, which considerably reduced its value. The trustees sought clarification of their duties. … Continue reading Hunt and Another v McLaren and others: ChD 4 Oct 2006
An indictment had not been signed despite a clear statutory provision that it should be. The defects were claimed to have been cured by amendment before sentence. Held: The convictions failed. Sections 1(1) and 2(1) of the 1933 Act which provided for a bill of indictment (which had of itself no legal standing save as … Continue reading Clarke, Regina v; Regina v McDaid: HL 6 Feb 2008
The plaintiffs were Indian Chiefs from Canada. They complained that the 1982 Act which granted independence to Canada, had been passed without their consent, which they said was required. They feared the loss of rights embedded by historical treaties. The Attorney General sought the strike out of the claims. Held: The application for a strike … Continue reading Manuel and Others v Attorney-General; Noltcho and Others v Attorney-General: ChD 7 May 1982
The claimant had sought damages against his employer, saying that they had failed in their duty to him under the 1997 Act in failing to prevent harassment by a manager. He appealed a strike out of his claim. Held: The appeal succeeded. The issue is whether an employer may be vicariously liable under section 3 … Continue reading Majrowski v Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Trust: CA 16 Mar 2005
K had been convicted of two counts of obtaining property by deception contrary to section 15 of the Theft Act 1968. He was also convicted of two counts under the Insolvency Act 1986, namely that being a bankrupt (a) he removed property which he was required to deliver up to the Official Receiver or his … Continue reading Regina v Kansal: CACD 24 Jun 1992
Administrative Discretion to be Used Reasonably The applicant challenged the manner of decision making as to the conditions which had been attached to its licence to open the cinema on Sundays. It had not been allowed to admit children under 15 years of age. The statute provided no appeal procedure, and the applicant sought a … Continue reading Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation: CA 10 Nov 1947
The applicant renewed his application for leave to appeal, which had been refused by the single judge. He instructed solicitors who wrote to the court to advise that they intended to instruct Counsel on the renewed application. Due to an administrative error the renewed application was listed, heard and dismissed on 14 June 1976 without … Continue reading Regina v Daniel: CACD 1977
The Serious Fraud Office appealed against rulings on the admission of evidence after its exclusion under section 78. Held: The appeal was allowed. The appeal had been brought within time and could proceed. Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. The judge confused or elided two quite separate concepts, namely (a) the ‘identification’ principle which is … Continue reading A Ltd and Othersi, Regina v: CACD 28 Jul 2016
No collateral attack on Jury findigs. An attempt was made to open up in a civil action, allegations of assaults by the police prior to the making of confessions which had been disposed of in a voir dire in the course of a criminal trial. The plaintiffs had imprisoned having spent many years after conviction … Continue reading Hunter v Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police: HL 19 Nov 1981
The court was asked as to as to the circumstances in which s.23 of the 1968 Act applies to fresh evidence or other information which an appellant may seek to adduce before this court on an appeal against sentence. Held: The rules applicable to the admission of fresh evidence under sectio 23 apply also to … Continue reading Rogers, Regina v: CACD 1 Jul 2016
The parties had arbitrated their dispute in London under a bilateral investment treaty between the US and Ecuador. The republic sought to appeal the arbitration. The applicant now appealed an order that the English High Court had jurisdiction to hear the appeal. Held: The appeal was dismissed. The treaty was intended to encourage bilateral trading … Continue reading Occidental Exploration and Production Company vRepublic of Ecuador: CA 9 Sep 2005
Identifying ‘maandatory’ and ‘regulatory’ The appellants had sought a Certificate of Alternative Development. The certificate provided was defective in that it did not notify the appellants, as required, of their right to appeal. Their appeal out of time was refused. Held: The House considered the consequences of a failure to comply with a procedural requirement, … Continue reading London and Clydeside Estates v Aberdeen District Council: HL 8 Nov 1979
The applicants had been made subject of anti-social behaviour orders. They challenged the basis upon which the orders had been made. Held: The orders had no identifiable consequences which would make the process a criminal one. Civil standards of evidence therefore applied, and hearsay evidence was admissible. Nevertheless, the test as to whether it was … Continue reading Clingham (formerly C (a minor)) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea; Regina v Crown Court at Manchester Ex parte McCann and Others: HL 17 Oct 2002
The applicants, parents of more than 800 Francophone children, living in certain (mostly Dutch-speaking) parts of Belgium, complained that their children were denied access to an education in French. Held: In establishing a system or regime to comply with a Convention obligation, a State may include within the system elements that are not strictly required … Continue reading Relating to certain aspects of the laws on the use of languages in education in Belgium (Belgian Linguistics) No 2: ECHR 9 Feb 1967
The principal claimants sold the rights to take photographs of their wedding to a co-claimant magazine (OK). Persons acting on behalf of the defendants took unauthorised photographs which the defendants published. The claimants had retained joint copyright over the photographs and reserved a right to control publication of any particular photographs. In return they made … Continue reading Douglas and others v Hello! Ltd and others (No 3): CA 18 May 2005
The defendant had succeeded in his appeal against a rape conviction. After the case, and his release, the prosecution sought a retrial. The defendant now argued that the court was functus officio. Held: An order on an appeal becomes final when it is recorded by the proper officer of the court of trial. As the … Continue reading Blackwood, Regina v: CACD 5 Mar 2012
The parties had cohabited for a long time, in a home bought by Ms Dowden. After the breakdown of the relationship, Mr Stack claimed an equal interest in the second family home, which they had bought in joint names. The House was asked whether, when a conveyance into joint names indicates only that each party … Continue reading Stack v Dowden: HL 25 Apr 2007
The applicants had been imprisoned and held without trial, being suspected of international terrorism. No criminal charges were intended to be brought. They were foreigners and free to return home if they wished, but feared for their lives if they did. A British subject, who was suspected in the exact same way, and there were … Continue reading A v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 16 Dec 2004
In an earlier judgment, redactions had been made relating to reports by the US government of its treatment of the claimant when held by them at Guantanamo bay. The claimant said he had been tortured and sought the documents to support his defence of his case in the US. The remaining issue was as to … Continue reading Mohamed, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 4): Admn 4 Feb 2009
The Court was asked whether the Government can lawfully act in a manner which is inconsistent with an order of a judge which is defective, without first applying for, and obtaining, the variation or setting aside of the order. The appellant had been . .
The defendant had been convicted, under regulations made under the Act, of smoking in a railway carriage. He sought to challenge the validity of the regulations themselves. He wanted to argue that the power to ban smoking on carriages did not . .
The appellant challenged a confiscation order made on his conviction of VAT fraud. It was argued that one could not be made unless a proper notice had been given, and none of the offences occurred before 1995. On the assumption that section 1 of the . .
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
