The contention in this appeal is that the conviction was unsafe because the judge was wrong to give a direction under section 34 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994. Citations: [2008] EWCA Crim 1028 Links: Bailii Statutes: Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 34 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Criminal Evidence Updated: … Continue reading Maguire, Regina v: CACD 25 Apr 2008
Appeal by case stated against conviction of having secured entry to premises by violence. Inferences to be drawn from defendant’s silence at police interview. The defendant complained that the magstrates should have set out clearly what inferences they had drawn and from what facts and allowed the defendant opportunity to make representations. Held: The magistrates … Continue reading T v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 10 Jul 2007
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder saying that the court had given inadequate directions as to his ‘no comment’ interview, the need to treat the evidence of a co-accused with caution, and the need for a bad character direction. Held: The appeal failed. The direction as to the no comment interview had allowed … Continue reading Najib v Regina: CACD 12 Feb 2013
Six conditions before jury may take inferences from silence under caution. Citations: Times 19-Dec-1996 Statutes: Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 34 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Crime Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.86057
The two appellants were among four convicted of robbery. Imran complained that the police had not disclosed the existence of CCTV coverage before the interview, and Hussain that a copy of the surveillance tape had been given to the jury after retirement. Held: Leave to appeal was refused. As to any obligation on the police … Continue reading Regina v Imran, Hussain: CACD 9 Jun 1997
The defendant was charged with robbing a McDonald’s restaurant. He had refused to answer questions when interviewed on arrest, and his solicitor had put on record that this was on the grounds that the solicitor did not think the evidence strong enough. At the trial, the defendant adduced the terms of that advice. The questions … Continue reading Regina v Bowden (BT): CACD 10 Feb 1999
A jury cannot convict solely on the basis of an inference, drawn under section 34, from the combination of an accused’s failure to give at interview, an explanation relied upon later at court. Additional evidence could be found not only from the prosecution case, but also from the defence. In a section 35 case however, … Continue reading Regina v Doldur: CACD 7 Dec 1999
D appealed against his conviction of indecently assaulting his young stepdaughter, on whose nightdress a small amount of seminal staining had been found. Giving evidence at trial he was asked by his counsel if he could think of any way in which semen might have found its way onto the nightdress, and he proffered an … Continue reading Regina v Nickolson: CACD 23 Jan 1998
The appellant was convicted of supplying heroin. He and his co-defendant who had pleaded guilty, had been filmed on video. The appellant did not give evidence but contended that it was the other, not he, who had supplied the heroin and received the price. Held: The defence had invited the jury to interpret a poor … Continue reading Regina v Mahmood: CACD 27 Jan 1998
Bowers and Millan complained that the direction given under section 34 was impermissible. The ground of complaint was that they had not relied on any fact by way of defence, but had simply put the prosecution to proof. Held: The court asked what evidence had been presented: ‘A fact relied on may, in our judgment, … Continue reading Regina v Bowers, Taylor, Millan: CACD 13 Mar 1998
The jury may be invited beyond the terms of the Judicial Studies Board direction for drawing of adverse inferences to allow if they consider that delay was attributable to desire to fabricate a defence. Citations: Times 10-Apr-1998 Statutes: Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 34 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Criminal Evidence Updated: 11 October … Continue reading Regina v Daniel: CACD 10 Apr 1998
‘The appeal primarily raises novel points arising out of s.35 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1984 which in essence provides that if the mental condition of the accused makes it undesirable for him to give evidence no adverse inference may be drawn from his failure to give evidence.’ Judges: Otton LJ Citations: [1997] EWCA … Continue reading Friend, Regina v: CACD 26 Mar 1997
The defendant appealed against his conviction for wounding with intent. He had answered ‘no comment’ in the police interview, but claimed self defence at trial. The court considered what note should be taken of the solicitor’s evidence of his advice on interview. Held: Rose LJ gave examples of where a solicitor’s advice to remain silent … Continue reading Regina v Roble: CACD 21 Jan 1997
The defendants were charged with the supply of heroin. They had declined to answer police questions and it was on the record that their solicitor had advised them not to do so, on the grounds that he considered them unfit because they were displaying withdrawal symptoms; the doctor who examined them had disagreed. Held: The … Continue reading Regina v Condron, Condron: CACD 17 Oct 1996
Guidance was given on the directions to be given to the jury where a co-accused speaks for prosecution as a witness and in sexual assault cases. The full corroboration warning is not now needed; the Judge may use his own discretion, and may give a lesser direction if he chooses. In this case there was … Continue reading Regina v Makanjuola: CACD 17 May 1995
CS The defendant had made no comment replies during interview. He did not give evidence at trial, but otherwise took part, though he did not put any fact before the jury. The judge directed the jury that they might draw adverse inferences from his silence. He appealed. Held: The facts put forward at trial must … Continue reading Regina v Chenia: CACD 1 Nov 2002
When a defendant was silent, it was necessary for the court to be especially careful to give precise and accurate directions on the effect of such silence as to the drawing of adverse inferences. Having answered questions on some aspects, it was not possible for the court to separate out the issues safely so as … Continue reading Regina v Gill: CACD 21 Jul 2000
The defendant had given no answers during his police interview, but instead his solicitor read out a full written statement of his case. At trial, he did not depart from the statement thus provided. He appealed after the judge allowed the jury to make adverse inferences from his silence, on the basis that it had … Continue reading Regina v Knight: CACD 29 Jul 2003
At his trial for murder, the defendant had not given evidence, and the court had allowed the jury to draw proper inferences under s35. Held: The JSB direction ‘on drawing inferences [i]s sufficiently fair to defendants, emphasising as it does that the jury must conclude that the only sensible explanation of his failure to give … Continue reading Regina v Becouarn: HL 28 Jul 2005
Citations: [2006] EWCA Crim 1716 Statutes: Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 34 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Regina v Boyle and Another CACD 25-Aug-2006 The appellants had been convicted of murder. They complained that the judge had misdirected the jury as to the effect of their silence and the inferences … Continue reading Regina v Adetoro: CACD 2006
Appeal against conviction for burglary: ‘The appeal is concerned only with the directions given to the jury as to the inferences which they might draw after the appellant absconded during the course of his trial.’ Held: The direction was faulty, but the evidence was strong and there had been no miscarriage of justice. Judges: Kennedy … Continue reading Gough, Regina v: CACD 8 Nov 2001
The defendant appealed against his conviction for preparing for terrorist offences, saying that the judge should not have allowed inferences to be drawn from from his decision not to give evidence. He had brought evidence that his physical or mental condition was such as to make it undesirable for him to give evidence. Judges: Hughes … Continue reading Tabbakh, Regina v: CACD 3 Mar 2009
Application of section 34 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 in a case where there are two or more defendants and it is a co-defendant rather than the prosecution which submits that the jury may draw an adverse inference from a defendant’s failure to put forward in police interviews the explanation which … Continue reading Regina v Dellaway and Moriarty: CACD 7 Apr 2000
The judge had failed in his direction to remind the jury that they had to find a case to answer before drawing any adverse inference from the defendant’s silence at trial Held: The court must be careful not to omit any elements of the standard directions to the jury on the drawing of inferences from … Continue reading Regina v Birchall: CACD 20 Jan 1998
The appellants had been convicted of murder. They complained that the judge had misdirected the jury as to the effect of their silence and the inferences to be drawn. Held: The appeals failed. Whilst the direction on s34 was defective, it had in fact steered the jury away from drawing adverse inferences, and if properly … Continue reading Regina v Boyle and Another: CACD 25 Aug 2006
The defendant appealed against her conviction for assisting in the disposal of the proceeds of criminal activity, saying that the judge had incorrectly ruled that she had waived legal privilege as to the advice given to her at the police station, and that an inference could be drawn under section 34. Under cross examination she … Continue reading Loizou, Regina v: CACD 14 Jul 2006
The court considered the drawing of adverse inferences form an accused’s silence in the police station when this was under legal advice: ‘The question in the end, it is for the jury, is whether regardless of advice, genuinely given and genuinely accepted, an accused has remained silent not because of that advice but because he … Continue reading Regina v Hoare and Pierce: CACD 2 Apr 2004
The defendant complained that the judge had given a direction under s34 even though his counsel had only put matters to witnesses for the prosecution. Held: A positive suggestion put to a witness by or on behalf of a defendant may amount to a fact relied on in his defence for the purpose of section … Continue reading Regina v Webber: HL 22 Jan 2004
M was convicted of possessing a class A drug with intent to supply. His defence at trial was that W was the dealer and he was merely a purchaser. He had not mentioned this to the police when questioned, on the ground (he said) that he did not want to land W in trouble. The … Continue reading Regina v Mountford: CACD 21 Dec 1998
The court set down the general approach to be taken where a suspect refused to answer questions put during his interview by the police. Judges: Lord Justice Laws Mr Justice Newman Sir Richard Tucker Citations: [2003] EWCA Crim 1, [2003] Crim LR 405 Links: Bailii Statutes: Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 34 Jurisdiction: … Continue reading Howell v Regina: CACD 17 Jan 2003
The appellants appealed their convictions on two grounds. First the judge who had heard the case was an acquaintance of the chief constable of the investigating force, and second evidence had been admitted of tape recordings of non-privileged conversations between defendants whilst in the police station. The Chief Constable had authorised the covert operation, and … Continue reading Mason, Wood, McClelland, Tierney v Regina: CACD 13 Feb 2002
The defendant had stayed silence at interview, and later at charge. During the trial, the judge ruled that the failure to answer questions at interview was inadmissible, but left to the jury the possibility of drawing adverse inferences from the silence at charge. He appealed. Held: So long as the fairness of the trial was … Continue reading Regina v Dervish and Another: CACD 12 Dec 2001
Where during a police interview, the defendant had maintained silence without stating facts which went to the heart of his defence, it was proper for the judge to refer to the section which would allow the jury to make proper inferences from that silence. The judge should consider carefully the model direction provided by the … Continue reading Regina v Gowland-Wynn: CACD 26 Nov 2001
The defendant appealed against his conviction for serious sexual assaults, saying that the court had wrongly allowed an inference to be drawn from his failure to answer questions during interview. He had at first refused to respond and said that his legal advice had been not to do so being affected by drink. He had … Continue reading Regina v Morgan: CACD 28 Feb 2001
Reader gave a no comment interview and did not testify at trial, because it was common ground that his counsel had done no more than put the prosecution to proof. Held: A setion 34 direction was wrong under these circumstances. Judges: Buxton LJ, Rougier J, The Common Serjeant of London Citations: [1998] EWCA Crim 1226 … Continue reading Regina v Reader, Connor, Hart: CACD 7 Apr 1998
Where the judge decided that no inference could be drawn from the defendant’s silence, because of the absence of facts which could have been mentioned, he had a duty positively to warn the jury not arbitrarily to draw adverse inferences from the silence. He had been wrong to leave it open to the jury to … Continue reading Regina v McGarry: CACD 16 Jul 1998
Where a defendant absconded and failed to give evidence, it was not right for the judge to direct the jury that his failure to give evidence because of his absconding allowed the drawing of adverse inferences. Before such an inference could be drawn, the defendant had to have the consequences of his failure to give … Continue reading Regina v Gough (Stephen): CACD 8 Nov 2001
D appealed a conviction after direction under s34. Held: The appeal failed. ‘Section 34 is designed, in part at any rate and perhaps principally, to deal with the sort of situation which not infrequently arises where a defence is advanced which has never been previously indicated even though there was sufficient opportunity to do so, … Continue reading Regina v Hearne and Coleman: CACD 4 May 2000
In the police station, the defendant had declined to answer police question, but had instead provided a written statement. Held: The practice had the danger that if, at trial, he discovered that something had been omitted from the statement, an inference might be sought to be drawn under the section. Here the written statement broadly … Continue reading Regina v Turner: CACD 6 Nov 2003
D complained that the judge had relied upon an inference under section 34 when holding that he had a case to answer. Held: The judge was wrong to do so: ‘The sort of circumstances we conceive to which paragraph (c) of subsection (2) [of section 34] applies are, for example, where the defence has involved … Continue reading Regina v Hart and Mclean: CACD 23 Apr 1998
The operation of section 35 is not to be reduced or marginalised. Judges: Lord Taylor of Gosforth CJ Citations: (1995) 161 JP 16 Statutes: Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 35 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Regina v Becouarn HL 28-Jul-2005 At his trial for murder, the defendant had not given … Continue reading Regina v Napper: CACD 1995
The appellant, who had previous convictions, did not give evidence, and the trial judge gave a direction in accordance with section 35. Held: The Court rejected a submission by the appellant’s counsel that the judge should have not have told the jury that they could draw inferences from the defendant’s failure to give evidence. Judges: … Continue reading Regina v Taylor: CACD 1999
The defendant had when at the police station refused to leave his cell to attend for interview. At trial, the judge said that the jury could take account of this as a failure to mention when questioned, something which he now wished to rely upon. Held: No questioning had taken place, and the inference could … Continue reading Regina v Johnson; Regina v Hind: CACD 11 Apr 2005
s34 is ‘a notorious minefield’. Judges: Dyson LJ Citations: [2003] EWCA Crim 3080[2003] EWCA Crim 3080, Times 15-Dec-2003 Statutes: Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 34 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Beckles, Regina v CACD 12-Nov-2004 The appellant had been convicted in 1997 of robbery and false imprisonment. His case was … Continue reading Regina v B (K J): CACD 1 Dec 2003
The defendant appealed by case stated from his conviction for using a motor vehicle fitted with a siren. When stopped various items suggesting that driver might be providing an ambulance service were found. The siren was not used. Held: The test was: ‘is the vehicle concerned used (or primarily used) for conveying the sick, the … Continue reading Lord-Castle v Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 23 Jan 2009
Failure to give mandatory warning as to consequences of failure to give evidence was not fatal to conviction after clear no inference drawn. Citations: Times 11-Mar-1998 Statutes: Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 35(2) Criminal Practice Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.87067
Sets procedures to follow at prosecution close with regard to defendant’s choice whether to give evidence. Citations: Gazette 05-Jul-1995 Statutes: Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 35 Criminal Practice Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.84952
Practice direction on what a Judge is to do about warning Defendant of the need to give evidence to avoid proper inferences being drawn from his silence under the Act. Citations: Times 12-Apr-1995 Statutes: Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 35(2) Criminal Practice Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.84875
‘The focus of the application is on the judge’s ruling on whether to give a direction under section 34 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 (‘a section 34 direction’) in relation to the applicant’s failure to mention in interview that the complainant ‘AB’ had fallen asleep in his car and that he … Continue reading Noor, Regina v: CACD 12 Nov 2021
The defendants sought leave to appeal against their convictions for robbery, and the Attorney-General appealed against sentences. The case was based largely on telephone call logs. Held: Leave to appeal was refused to the defendants. The extent of circumstantial evidence was persuasive. Leave to appeal was granted to the Attorney-General and the sentences increased. Fulford … Continue reading Esprit and Others, v Regina: CACD 3 Oct 2014
The defendant had been accused of recent fabrication of evidence, having given evidence in court which varied from that given in interview on arrest. The crown had commented on his failure to call his solicitor to give evidence. The defendant said this amounted to an infringement of legal professional privilege. Held: Wilmot was not authority … Continue reading Seaton v Regina: CACD 13 Aug 2010
Adverse inference – no direct questions Appeal from conviction – wrongful use of section 34 of 1994 Act after no comment interview. The defendant argued that no actual questions had been asked. Held: The appeal failed: ‘in order for the section to operate it is necessary that the defendant is being questioned under caution and … Continue reading Green, Regina v: CACD 1 Mar 2019
Disclosure Sufficient to Support Inference The court was asked whether sufficient evidence had been adduced about the strength of the prosecution case at the time of interview, to permit an adverse inference to be drawn from the failure to mention specific facts pursuant to section 34 of the 1994 Act. The defendant was said to … Continue reading Black v Regina: CACD 17 Jul 2020
The defendant complained that, after acting on his solicitor’s advice to not answer questions when interviewed by the police, the court had allowed the jury to draw inferences from his failure. The police had failed to make such full disclosure of the case against the appellant as they could and should have done. The solicitor’s … Continue reading Regina v Argent: CACD 16 Dec 1996
CS Kennedy LJ: ‘we accept that if the jury was to be permitted to draw an inference a careful direction was required, for two interrelated reasons. First, there were matters on which the defendant was entitled to . .
Cases where the jury are to be allowed to draw inferences from silence, are to be limited to the situations as tightly defined under the Act. . .
The court considered an appeal where the jury had been invited to draw an inference from the defendant’s silence at interview that the defendant ‘had not had a chance to prepare his story’ as being its equivalent. Held: The court accepted the inference as proper in the circumstances. Citations: [2003] EWCA Crim 1767 Links: Bailii … Continue reading Ramadan El-Delbi, Regina v: CACD 20 Jun 2003
The defendant appealed against his conviction for assaulting a police officer. He complained that he had been subjected to an unlawful assault, in that before being searched under the 1994 Act, the officer had not given his details. Held: The obligation on an officer to provide his name, number and station was mandatory and a … Continue reading Osman v Southwark Crown Court: Admn 1 Jul 1999
The defendant got drunk and set fire to the hotel where he worked. Guests were present. He was indicted upon two counts of arson. He pleaded guilty to the 1(1) count but contested the 1(2) charge, saying he was so drunk that the thought there might be people never crossed his mind. Setting aside his … Continue reading Commissioner of Police v Caldwell: HL 19 Mar 1981
Fair Coment on Political Activities The defendant newspaper had published articles wrongly accusing the claimant, the former Prime Minister of Ireland of duplicity. The paper now appealed, saying that it should have had available to it a defence of qualified privilege because of the claimant’s status as a politician. Held: The appeal failed (Lords Hope … Continue reading Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd and others: HL 28 Oct 1999
Appeals were brought complaining as to the apparent reversal of the burden of proof in road traffic cases and in cases under the Terrorism Acts. Was a legal or an evidential burden placed on a defendant? Held: Lord Bingham of Cornhill said: ‘The overriding concern is that a trial should be fair, and the presumption … Continue reading Sheldrake v Director of Public Prosecutions; Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002: HL 14 Oct 2004
The mother of the child on behalf of whom the application was made, was to face trial for murder. The child was in care and an order was sought to restrain publiction of material which might reveal his identity, including matters arising during the trial. Held: (Hale LJ dissenting) The court in this case was … Continue reading Re S (A Child): CA 10 Jul 2003
The appellant a foreign national, had been convicted of very serious sex offences, and as his sentence came to an end was ordered to be deported. He appealed saying this infringed his right to a family life. Held: The court had to balance the public revulsion at his crimes with the need for compassion. The … Continue reading N (Kenya) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 5 Aug 2004
The complainant requested information from South Wales Police (‘SWP’) about policies and training concerning authorisations made under section 60 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994. By the date of this notice SWP had not issued a substantive response to this request. The Commissioner’s decision is that SWP has breached section 10 of … Continue reading Chief Commissioner of South Wales Police (Police and Criminal Justice): ICO 24 Jan 2022
A discretionary life prisoner who had been transferred to a mental hospital is not automatically eligible for a certificate under the section. The right conferred on a discretionary life prisoner by section 34 of the 1991 Act did not extend to those who were also detained under the MHA by reason of transfer and restriction … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte H and Others, Regina v Same ex parte Hickey: CA 29 Jul 1994
The defendants protested the growing of genetically modified crops. The prosecutor appealed dismissal of charges of aggravated trespass for them having entered a crop and attached themselves to tractors. The district judge decided they had genuine fears for the surrounding area, and had not acted unlawfully. Held: Where a defence of lawful justification is put … Continue reading Director of Public Prosecutions v Bayer, Hart, Snook, and Whistance: Admn 4 Nov 2003
British authorities, in disregard of available extradition procedures, initiated and procured the unlawful deportation of the appellant from Zimbabwe to England. The appellant was charged and tried for conspiracy to cause explosions likely to endanger life or to cause serious injury to property. It was alleged that he was a member of the IRA. In … Continue reading Regina v Mullen: CACD 4 Feb 1999
The defendant had been wrongly convicted of IRA bombings. She said that the prosecution had failed to disclose evidence. Held: The prosecution’s forensic scientists are under a common law duty to disclose to the defence anything they may discover which may assist the defendant. ‘Non-disclosure is a potent source of injustice and even with the … Continue reading Regina v Ward (Judith): CACD 15 Jul 1992
Courts which were considering detaining an offender between 12 and 15 years old should be asked to consider the new section 1 even though the section was not yet in force. Citations: Times 29-Jan-1998 Statutes: Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 1, Children and Young Persons Act 1933 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Criminal Sentencing … Continue reading Regina v Sheffield Youth Justices ex parte M: QBD 29 Jan 1998
The court set out the sentencing considerations for firearms offences in the light of an increase of the use of guns. Held: The level of sentencing had not sufficiently reflected the gravity of such offences. After the 1994 Act, earlier sentencing cases were not reliable as a guide. The applicable principles are: ‘(1) What sort … Continue reading Regina v Avis, T and others: CACD 16 Dec 1997
The claimant advanced funds to the respondent for him to invest in a bank of which the claimant had insider knowledge. In fact the defendant did not invest the funds, the knowledge was incorrect. The defendant however did not return the sums advanced, saying he need not return it because the contract was for an … Continue reading Patel v Mirza: SC 20 Jul 2016
The defendants appealed sentences for serious, violent robberies taking place in burglaries of domestic properties, with long lasting effects on the victims. Held: The section had been correctly applied. The court reviewed authorities on sentencing for such matters. 12 years was appropriate for the robberies, with 5 years added to protect the public. Judges: Lord … Continue reading Regina v Gabbidon, Bramble: CACD 7 Nov 1996
Detailed guidance was given on directions when a jury are to be allowed to split up overnight after retiring using the court’s discretion under s43, including ‘1. That the jury must decide the case on the evidence and the arguments which they have seen and heard in court, and not on anything they may have … Continue reading Regina v Oliver (Ian): CACD 6 Dec 1995
Detailed directions were provided for the judge to give to a jury where a defendant chooses not to give evidence in his defence in the Crown Court. Lord Taylor of Gosforth said: ‘1. The judge will have told the jury that the burden of proof remains upon the prosecution throughout and what the required standard … Continue reading Regina v Cowan and Another: CACD 12 Oct 1995
The defendant appealed by case stated against his conviction for aggravated trespass. Hostile protesters had entered into Millbank Tower, and ignited smoke bombs and smashed a large plate glass window from the outside. Held: Irwin J said: ‘On facts such as this, however, the mass invasion of a building and the particular persistence in remaining … Continue reading Peppersharp v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 10 Feb 2012
The defendant who was aged 16 gave a no comment interview on the advice of his solicitor. At trial he waived privilege and his solicitor gave evidence that he had given him before interview a very similar account of the incident to that which the defendant had himself given the jury at trial. The judge … Continue reading Regina v JO: CACD 9 Jun 2000
When commencing proceedings under the Act, the papers were defective. The secretary of state had failed to give appropriate notice, and thus prevented him from making representations as to the allegations. The allegations involved the manipulation of cheques to create artificial balances. Held: In this case the Secretary of State’s papers contained irrelevant matters and … Continue reading The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Swan and Othes: ChD 22 Jul 2003
D was charged with three co-defendants with conspiring to import cannabis. He gave a largely no comment interview to the interviewing customs officer, but at trial said that the contacts with his co-defendants were innocent. Since this account had not been given in interview, the judge gave a section 34 direction. Held: The appeal failed … Continue reading Regina v Milford: CACD 21 Dec 2000
The claimant alleged that she had been discrimated against in her work for the appellant, a member of the diplomatic staff at the Saudi Embassy in London. She now appealed against a decision that the respondent had diplomatic immunity. Held: The appeal was allowed: ‘the question whether the exception in article 31(1)(c) would have applied … Continue reading Reyes v Al-Malki and Another: SC 18 Oct 2017
The offence of witness intimidation was committed by a defendant, even though the threats were made by a third party on his behalf, provided the threat was intended by the accused to be passed to the witness, and provided the other elements of the offence were present. Citations: Times 06-Jul-1999, Gazette 30-Jun-1999, [1999] EWCA Crim … Continue reading Attorney General’s Reference No 1 of 1999 (Newberry): CACD 16 Mar 1999
The claimant sought to prevent publication of his name in the context of the making of a Sexual Offences Prevention Order (SOPO). He had been convicted of offences against sex workers. An order had been made preventing disclosure of his address, but not his name. Held: The claim should be struck out. The existing articles … Continue reading Allen v The Grimsby Telegraph and Another: QBD 2 Mar 2011
The DPP sought directions as to the issuing of voluntary bills of indictment to have transferred to the Crown Court, allegations of robbery against youths between 12 and 14. Held: A child convicted of an offence for which an adult would receive a custodial sentence can receive a maximum youth training order of 24 months. … Continue reading Regina (Director of Public Prosecutions) v Camberwell Youth Court; Regina (H) v Camberwell Youth Court: QBD 23 Jul 2004
The defendant appealed convictions for sexual assault against four young girls. Held: The admissibility of ‘similar fact’ evidence depends upon the degree of its relevance. If only suggests propensity it is inadmissible. If it goes further and can be shown to be relevant to, and probative of, a particular issue in the case, then it … Continue reading Regina v Venn: CACD 1 Feb 2003
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 claimant journalist sought disclosure of papers acquired by the respondent in its conduct of enquiries into the charitable Mariam appeal. The Commission referred to an absolute exemption under section 32(2) of the 2000 Act, saying that the exemption continued until the papers were destroyed, or for 20 years under the 1958 Act. Held: The … Continue reading Kennedy v The Charity Commission: SC 26 Mar 2014
Evidence from 3rd Party Torture Inadmissible The applicants had been detained following the issue of certificates issued by the respondent that they posed a terrorist threat. They challenged the decisions of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission saying that evidence underlying the decisions had probably been obtained by torture committed by foreign powers, and should not … Continue reading A and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department (No 2): HL 8 Dec 2005
Twins were conjoined (Siamese). Medically, both could not survive, and one was dependent upon the vital organs of the other. Doctors applied for permission to separate the twins which would be followed by the inevitable death of one of them. The parents, devout Roman Catholics, resisted. Held: The parents’ views were subject to the overriding … Continue reading In Re A (Minors) (Conjoined Twins: Medical Treatment); aka In re A (Children) (Conjoined Twins: Surgical Separation): CA 22 Sep 2000
(Jamaica) A five year delay in execution is excessive, and can itself amount to inhuman or degrading punishment. ‘There is an instinctive revulsion against the prospect of hanging a man after he has been held under sentence of death for many years. What gives rise to this instinctive revulsion? The answer can only be our … Continue reading Pratt and Morgan v The Attorney General for Jamaica and Another: PC 2 Nov 1993
The defendants faced charges under the two Acts. They raised as a preliminary issue whether it is necessary for the Crown to prove that the property being converted was in fact the proceeds, in the case of the 1994 Act, of drug trafficking and, in the case of the 1988 Act, of crime. The Crown … Continue reading Regina v Montila and Others: HL 25 Nov 2004
The defendant appealed aganst his conviction for conspiracy to engage in moneylaundering. At trial he pleaded guilty subject to a qualification that he had not known that the money was the proceeds of crime, though he may have suspected that it would be. Held: (Baroness Hale of Richmond dissenting) The appeal succeeded: ‘the Crown’s principal … Continue reading Saik, Regina v: HL 3 May 2006
The defendant appealed a conviction for buggery of a complainant under the age of 16, saying that he had a genuine belief that the boy had been of age. Held: Buggery was not an absolute offence. The amendments to the 1956 Act did not signify that the age related offence should be one of strict … Continue reading Regina v Kumar: CACD 16 Dec 2004
Representative claims were made against the respondents, hospitals, pathologists etc with regard to the removal of organs from deceased children without the informed consent of the parents. They claimed under the tort of wrongful interference. Held: Organ removal when a post mortem had been ordered by the coroner was not tortious. In English law there … Continue reading AB and others v Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust, Cardiff and Vale NHS Trust: QBD 26 Mar 2004
Unlawful occupation of land by travellers Judges: Anthony Elleray QC Sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge Citations: [2022] EWHC 1731 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 77 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Land Updated: 15 July 2022; Ref: scu.679104
Inherent High Court power may restrain Publicity The claimant child’s mother was to be tried for the murder of his brother by poisoning with salt. It was feared that the publicity which would normally attend a trial, would be damaging to S, and an application was made for reporting restrictions to be applied to avoid … Continue reading In re S (a Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication): HL 28 Oct 2004
The claimants had been detained under the 1971 Act, after completing sentences of imprisonment pending their return to their home countries under deportations recommended by the judges at trial, or chosen by the respondent. They challenged as unlawful the respondent’s, at first unpublished, policy introduced in 2006, that by default, those awaiting deportation should be … Continue reading Lumba (WL) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 23 Mar 2011
Challenge to decision not to prosecute senior Intelligence Service officials for alleged offences in connection with his unlawful rendition and mistreatment in Libya. The issue here was whether on the hearing of the application for judicial review, it would be open to the Court to receive closed material disclosed only to the court and a … Continue reading Belhaj and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another: SC 4 Jul 2018
The claimant said that his continued detention after the custody time limits had expired was an infringement of his human rights. He faced continued detention having been refused bail because of his arrest on a grave charge, having a previous conviction for another grave offence. Held: The appeal was dismissed. Insofar as the the word … Continue reading O v Crown Court at Harrow: HL 26 Jul 2006
The several defendants complained at the use at their trials of evidence given anonymously. The perceived need for anonymity arose because, from intimidation, the witnesses would not be willing to give their evidence without it. Held: The anonymity ruling did not prevent proper investigation with the witnesses in open court of the essential elements of … Continue reading Regina v Davis (Iain); Regina v Ellis, Regina v Gregory, Regina v Simms, Regina v Martin: CACD 19 May 2006
The defendant had been convicted of offences in which he had operated to purchase companies and use false debentures to evade corporation tax. Compensation had been sought under the 1988 Act. It was argued that the confiscation order should be quashed because the defendant had not benefitted as alleged. Held: The appeals failed. The court … Continue reading Regina v Stannard: CACD 1 Nov 2005
The defendants appealed against confiscation orders on the basis that in various ways, the Crown had failed to comply with procedural requirements. Held: The courts must remember the importance of such procedures in the fight against crime, and must not allow procedural or technical failures to defeat that purpose. Courts should rather look to see … Continue reading Sekhon, etc v Regina: CACD 16 Dec 2002