Click the case name for better results:

Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002: CACD 21 Mar 2003

The defendant had been tried for an offence under the Act of being a member of a proscribed organisation, and professing membership of Hamas. At trial the Crown accepted an evidential burden, that the offence had to be read down to comply with the defendant’s article 6.2 rights, and the defendant was acquitted. A reference … Continue reading Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002: CACD 21 Mar 2003

Regina v S (Trade Mark Defence) (Roger Sliney v London Borough of Havering): CACD 20 Nov 2002

The defendant alleged that the offence of which had been convicted, under the 1994 Act, infringed his rights under article 6.2 in reversing the burden of proof. Held: The principle that the duty of proof lay on the prosecution was subject to statutory exceptions. To place a legal (persuasive) burden of proof on the defendant … Continue reading Regina v S (Trade Mark Defence) (Roger Sliney v London Borough of Havering): CACD 20 Nov 2002

Sheldrake v Director of Public Prosecutions; Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002: HL 14 Oct 2004

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

Regina v Johnstone: HL 22 May 2003

The defendant was convicted under the 1994 Act of producing counterfeit CDs. He argued that the affixing of the name of the artist to the CD was not a trade mark use, and that the prosecution had first to establish a civil offence before his act could become criminal. The prosecutor appealed the decision of … Continue reading Regina v Johnstone: HL 22 May 2003

Savickas And Others v Lithuania (Dec): ECHR 15 Oct 2013

ECHR Article 35-1 Exhaustion of domestic remedies Effective domestic remedy Length-of-proceedings complaint under Article 6.272 of the Civil Code as interpreted by domestic courts: effective remedy: inadmissible Facts – The applicants were serving or former judges or their lawful heirs. Following a reduction in judges’ salaries by 30% in 1999, the applicants instituted proceedings before … Continue reading Savickas And Others v Lithuania (Dec): ECHR 15 Oct 2013