Click the case name for better results:

Regina v Hoare and Pierce: CACD 2 Apr 2004

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

Howell v Regina: CACD 17 Jan 2003

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

Mason, Wood, McClelland, Tierney v Regina: CACD 13 Feb 2002

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

Regina v Dervish and Another: CACD 12 Dec 2001

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

Regina v Reader, Connor, Hart: CACD 7 Apr 1998

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

Regina v Hearne and Coleman: CACD 4 May 2000

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

Regina v Johnson; Regina v Hind: CACD 11 Apr 2005

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

Regina v B (K J): CACD 1 Dec 2003

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

Brizzalari v Regina: CACD 19 Feb 2004

Limits to Requests for Adverse Inferences In closing, prosecuting counsel had suggested that during the trial two matters had been mentioned by the defence which had not been mentioned earlier, and that the jury should feel free to draw proper inferences under the 1984 Act from that failure. The judge endorsed that view to the … Continue reading Brizzalari v Regina: CACD 19 Feb 2004

Seaton v Regina: CACD 13 Aug 2010

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

Green, Regina v: CACD 1 Mar 2019

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

Regina v Argent: CACD 16 Dec 1996

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

Khan, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health: CA 10 Oct 2003

The claimant’s child had died as a result of negligence in hospital. The parents had been told the result of police investigation and decision not to prosecute, and the hospital’s own investigation, but had not been sufficiently involved. There remained unresolved suspicions of negligence having been covered up. They had been refused legal aid to … Continue reading Khan, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health: CA 10 Oct 2003

Regina (on the Application of Fuller, Wright, Tarr and Booth) v Chief Constable of Dorset Police and Another: Admn 12 Dec 2001

The applicants sought to test the human rights compatibility of the section when applied to gypsies. The travellers sought to stay on land within the district. The local authority used its policy, and agreed to tolerate the encampment for a short time. There was a serious incident with police officers being held temporarily. After refusing … Continue reading Regina (on the Application of Fuller, Wright, Tarr and Booth) v Chief Constable of Dorset Police and Another: Admn 12 Dec 2001

SBC v The United Kingdom: ECHR 19 Jun 2001

Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 5-3; Violation of Art. 5-5; No violation of Art. 13The respondent government conceded that the absolute ban on the grant of bail to section 25 defendants provided for by section 25 violated article 5(3), insofar as it prohibited the grant of bail to defendants accused of … Continue reading SBC v The United Kingdom: ECHR 19 Jun 2001

Thynne, Wilson and Gunnell v The United Kingdom: ECHR 25 Oct 1990

The applicants, discretionary life prisoners, complained of a violation on the ground that they were not able to have the continued lawfulness of their detention decided by a court at reasonable intervals throughout their imprisonment. Held: A discretionary life sentence in English law was composed of a punitive element followed by a security element giving … Continue reading Thynne, Wilson and Gunnell v The United Kingdom: ECHR 25 Oct 1990

Regina v Wisdom and Sinclair: CACD 10 Dec 1999

Rarely if ever could a section 34 direction be appropriate on failure to mention an admittedly true fact at interview. Since the adverse inference in question is that a matter not mentioned at interview is likely to be untrue, there is no room for the inference if that matter is agreed to be true. Citations: … Continue reading Regina v Wisdom and Sinclair: CACD 10 Dec 1999

Roberts v Parole Board: HL 7 Jul 2005

Balancing Rights of Prisoner and Society The appellant had been convicted of the murder of three police officers in 1966. His tariff of thirty years had now long expired. He complained that material put before the Parole Board reviewing has case had not been disclosed to him. Held: The appeal failed (by a majority). The … Continue reading Roberts v Parole Board: HL 7 Jul 2005

Finucane, Re Application for Judicial Review: SC 27 Feb 2019

(Northern Ireland) The deceased solicitor was murdered in his home in 1989, allegedly by loyalists. They had never been identified, though collusion between security forces and a loyalist paramilitary was established. The ECHR and a judge led inquiry had said that a proper investigation was required. A promised inquiry under the 2005 Act was objected … Continue reading Finucane, Re Application for Judicial Review: SC 27 Feb 2019

T and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Another: SC 18 Jun 2014

T and JB, asserted that the reference in certificates issued by the state to cautions given to them violated their right to respect for their private life under article 8 of the Convention. T further claims that the obligation cast upon him to disclose the warnings given to him violated the same right. Held: The … Continue reading T and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Another: SC 18 Jun 2014

Regina v Secretary of State for The Home Department Ex Parte Simms: HL 8 Jul 1999

Ban on Prisoners talking to Journalists unlawful The two prisoners, serving life sentences for murder, had had their appeals rejected. They continued to protest innocence, and sought to bring their campaigns to public attention through the press, having oral interviews with journalists without undertakings from the journalists not to publish any element of the interview. … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for The Home Department Ex Parte Simms: HL 8 Jul 1999

In Re A (Minors) (Conjoined Twins: Medical Treatment); aka In re A (Children) (Conjoined Twins: Surgical Separation): CA 22 Sep 2000

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

Regina v Jones (Margaret), Regina v Milling and others: HL 29 Mar 2006

Domestic Offence requires Domestic Defence Each defendant sought to raise by way of defence of their otherwise criminal actions, the fact that they were attempting to prevent the commission by the government of the crime of waging an aggressive war in Iraq, and that their acts were accordingly justified in law. Held: The law on … Continue reading Regina v Jones (Margaret), Regina v Milling and others: HL 29 Mar 2006

Condron v The United Kingdom: ECHR 2 May 2000

A direction to a jury about an accused person’s silence during police questioning was inadequate to protect the right to a fair trial. The applicants had been advised by their solicitor to remain silent during interview because they were withdrawing from heroin. The judge allowed the jury the option of drawing an adverse inference from … Continue reading Condron v The United Kingdom: ECHR 2 May 2000

Derbyshire County Council v Times Newspapers Ltd and Others: HL 18 Feb 1993

Local Council may not Sue in Defamation Local Authorities must be open to criticism as political and administrative bodies, and so cannot be allowed to sue in defamation. Such a right would operate as ‘a chill factor’ on free speech. Freedom of speech was the underlying value which supported the decision to lay down the … Continue reading Derbyshire County Council v Times Newspapers Ltd and Others: HL 18 Feb 1993

H M Customs and Excise and Another v MCA and Another; A v A; Re MCA: CA 22 Jul 2002

The husband and wife divorced and a property adjustment order applied for. The husband had been convicted and a drugs proceeds order made under the 1994 Act. The order had not been satisfied, and the receiver applied for money from the matrimonial property. Held: The two Acts gave no indication that either was to take … Continue reading H M Customs and Excise and Another v MCA and Another; A v A; Re MCA: CA 22 Jul 2002

Saunders v The United Kingdom: ECHR 17 Dec 1996

(Grand Chamber) The subsequent use against a defendant in a prosecution, of evidence which had been obtained under compulsion in company insolvency procedures was a convention breach of Art 6. Although not specifically mentioned in Article 6 of the Convention the right to silence and the right not to incriminate oneself are generally recognised international … Continue reading Saunders v The United Kingdom: ECHR 17 Dec 1996

Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd and others: HL 28 Oct 1999

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

Oracle America Inc v M-Tech Data Ltd: SC 27 Jun 2012

The appellant complained that the respondent had imported into the European Economic Area disk drives bearing its trade marks in breach of the appellant’s rights. The respondent had argued that the appellant had abused its position by withholding information which would allow it to trade lawfully. The Court was now asked: ‘whether a person who … Continue reading Oracle America Inc v M-Tech Data Ltd: SC 27 Jun 2012

Petkar and Farquar, Regina v: CACD 16 Oct 2003

The defendants appealed their convictions and sentence for theft. Whilst employed by a bank thay had arranged for transfers to their own account. Each blamed the other. They appealed on the basis that the direction on their silence at interview was incorrect, the judge having left open the inferences which might be drawn. Held: The … Continue reading Petkar and Farquar, Regina v: CACD 16 Oct 2003

Regina v H; Regina v C: HL 5 Feb 2004

Use of Special Counsel as Last Resort Only The accused faced charges of conspiring to supply Class A drugs. The prosecution had sought public interest immunity certificates. Special counsel had been appointed by the court to represent the defendants’ interests at the applications. Held: It was permissible to use special counsel, but this must genuinely … Continue reading Regina v H; Regina v C: HL 5 Feb 2004

Total Network Sl v Revenue and Customs: HL 12 Mar 2008

The House was asked whether an action for unlawful means conspiracy was available against a participant in a missing trader intra-community, or carousel, fraud. The company appealed a finding of liability saying that the VAT Act and Regulations contained the entire regime. Held: Criminal conduct at common law or by statute can constitute unlawful means … Continue reading Total Network Sl v Revenue and Customs: HL 12 Mar 2008

Martin v Watson: HL 13 Jul 1995

The plaintiff had been falsely reported to the police by the defendant, a neighbour, for indecent exposure whilst standing on a ladder in his garden. He had been arrested and charged, but at a hearing before the Magistrates’ Court, the Crown Prosecution Service offered no evidence, and the charge was dismissed. He appealed against the … Continue reading Martin v Watson: HL 13 Jul 1995

Attorney General’s Reference No 3 of 1999: Application By the British Broadcasting Corporation To Set Aside or Vary a Reporting Restriction Order: HL 17 Jun 2009

An application was made to discharge an anonymity order made in previous criminal proceedings before the House. The defendant was to be retried for rape under the 2003 Act, after an earlier acquittal. The applicant questioned whether such a order could properly be made, and said that in any event it should be discharged. Held: … Continue reading Attorney General’s Reference No 3 of 1999: Application By the British Broadcasting Corporation To Set Aside or Vary a Reporting Restriction Order: HL 17 Jun 2009

Bauer and Others v The Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 22 Mar 2013

The appellants had entered Fortnum and Masons to demonstrate against tax avoidance. They appealed against convitions for aggravated trespass. Held: The statutory question posed by s.68 is whether the prosecution can prove that the trespasser has done anything on the land (‘there’), apart from trespassing, with the required statutory intent? As to that, there is … Continue reading Bauer and Others v The Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 22 Mar 2013

HM Attorney General v Seckerson and Times Newspapers Ltd: Admn 13 May 2009

The first defendant had been foreman of a jury in a criminal trial. He was accused of disclosing details of the jury’s votes and their considerations with concerns about the expert witnesses to the second defendant. The parties disputed the extent of disclosure required to amount to an offence. Held: There was no place for … Continue reading HM Attorney General v Seckerson and Times Newspapers Ltd: Admn 13 May 2009

Al Rawi and Others v The Security Service and Others: SC 13 Jul 2011

The claimant pursued a civil claim for damages, alleging complicity of the respondent in his torture whilst in the custody of foreign powers. The respondent sought that certain materials be available to the court alone and not to the claimant or the public under a closed material procedure. It argued that whilst the need for … Continue reading Al Rawi and Others v The Security Service and Others: SC 13 Jul 2011

C (A Minor) v Director of Public Prosecutions: HL 17 Mar 1995

The House considered whether the long established rule of the criminal law presuming that a child did not have a guilty mind should be set aside. Held: Doli incapax, the presumption of a child’s lack of mens rea, is still effective and good law, but a child is not capable at law without the requisite … Continue reading C (A Minor) v Director of Public Prosecutions: HL 17 Mar 1995

Regina v Soneji and Bullen: HL 21 Jul 2005

The defendants had had confiscation orders made against them. They had appealed on the basis that the orders were made more than six months after sentence. The prosecutor now appealed saying that the fact that the order were not timely did not invalidate them. Held: The appeal was allowed. The confiscation orders made by the … Continue reading Regina v Soneji and Bullen: HL 21 Jul 2005

Sandiford, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs: SC 16 Jul 2014

The appellant a British Citizen awaited execution in Singapore after conviction on a drugs charge. The only way she might get legal help for a further appeal would be if she was given legal aid by the respondent. She sought assistance both on Human Rights under article 6(2) and under common law. Held: The appeal … Continue reading Sandiford, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs: SC 16 Jul 2014

Black v Regina: CACD 17 Jul 2020

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

Acts

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