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
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
(Crown Court at Birmingham) A doctor who had fitted a patient, with an IUD was charged with an offence under section 58 of the 1861 Act. Having heard medical evidence from two consultant gynaecologists and legal argument the judge withdrew the case from the jury. The medical expert said ‘so far as the current thinking … Continue reading Regina v Dhingra: CC 1991
The court was asked whether nurses could properly involve themselves in a pregnancy termination procedure not known when the Act was passed, and in particular, whether a pregnancy was ‘terminated by a medical practitioner’, when it was carried out by nurses acting on the instructions of such a practitioner. Held: The phrase ‘treatment for the … Continue reading Royal College of Nursing of the United Kingdom v Department of Health and Social Security: HL 2 Jan 1981
The claimant sought judicial review of a decision of the DPP to intervene in and abandon her private prosecution of two doctors involved n what she said was a decision to carry out abortions which decsions were affected by the sex of the foetus. At the instigation of a newspapers, two women had attended clinics … Continue reading Hubert, Regina (on The Application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another: Admn 18 Dec 2015
The claimant challenged the Order as regards the prescription of the morning-after pill, asserting that the pill would cause miscarriages, and that therefore the use would be an offence under the 1861 Act. Held: ‘SPUC’s case is that any interference with a fertilised egg, if it leads to the loss of the egg, involves the … Continue reading Regina (Smeaton) v Secretary of State for Health and Others: Admn 18 Apr 2002
The Commission challenged the compatibility of the NI law relating to banning nearly all abortions with Human Rights Law. It now challenged a decision that it did not have standing to bring the case.
Held: (Lady Hale, Lord Kerr and Lord Wilson . .
Appeal by the Attorney General and Department of Justice against an Order declaring that sections 58 and 59 of the 1861 Act and section 25 of the 1945 Act were incompatible with Article 8 of ECHR insofar as it is an offence:
(i) to procure a . .
An eminent surgeon openly in a public hospital operated to terminate the pregnancy of a 14 year old girl who had become pregnant in consequence of a violent rape.
Held: The court suggested when summing up that there might be a duty in certain . .
The defendant appealed his conviction for assault. He had suspected a lodger of theft, and was accused of having assaulted him while interrogating him about it. He locked the complainant in his room, but he then fell whilst escaping through a first floor window. The prosecution was on the basis that the terror induced itself … Continue reading Fook, Regina v: CACD 22 Oct 1993
Appeal against sentence of 16 months on plea of guilty to assault occasioning actual bodily harm, contrary to section 47 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. Citations: [2020] EWCA Crim 909 Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Criminal Sentencing Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.657258
‘whether on a charge, under s38 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, of assault with intent to resist lawful apprehension for failing a roadside breathalyser test, it is a defence that the defendant honestly believed that he had not failed the test. Put another way, and more widely, does the mens rea for … Continue reading Regina v Lee: CACD 29 Sep 2000
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
The court applied a subjective test when asking whether the defendant intended the harm caused. Citations: (1961) 45 Cr App R 304 Statutes: Offences Against the Persons Act 1861 46 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Fook, Regina v CACD 22-Oct-1993 The defendant appealed his conviction for assault. He had suspected a lodger … Continue reading Regina v Metharam: CCA 1961
The defendant was attacked by his victim, and he hit his victim in the face. He was charged with wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm with an alternative of unlawful wounding also open to the jury. The judge gave no direction on the meaning of ‘maliciously’ and the jury convicted under section 20. … Continue reading Regina v Mowatt: CACD 20 Jun 1967
The Attorney General referred the sentences as too lenient for armed robbery, and aggravated vehicle taking. The defendants worked as a team, and used an imitation firearm, and threatened a victim with it. Held: The possession of firearms should be regarded as an aggravating feature in relation to other offences. When passing sentence, it is … Continue reading Attorney General’s Reference No 88 of 2002 (Hahn and Webster): CACD 7 Nov 2003
The defendant had hit a mother in the face as she held the child. The force was sufficient to cause her to drop the child causing injury to the child. He appealed against a conviction for beating the child. Held: The appeal failed. A battery could be inflicted even though the force actually used was … Continue reading Haystead v Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 2 Jun 2000
Joint Enterprise Murder (and in Privy Council) The two defendants appealed against their convictions (one in Jamaica) for murder, under the law of joint enterprise. Each had been an accessory when their accomplice killed a victim with a knife. The judge in Jogee had directed the jury that he would be guilty of murder as … Continue reading Jogee and Ruddock (Jamaica) v The Queen: SC 18 Feb 2016
The defendant appealed against conviction after being involved in sexual activity which he said was not intended to cause harm, and were said to be consensual, but clearly did risk harm. On the first occasion he tied a plastic bag over the head of his partner. On the second, he poured lighter fluid over the … Continue reading Regina v Emmett: CACD 18 Jun 1999
The defendant appealed against his conviction on a guilty plea, of inflicting grievous bodily harm under section 20. He suffered genital herpes, but had unprotected sex and acknowledged acting recklessly. He said that the prosecution had failed to follow CPS guidelines, that his solicitor had failed to challenge that failure, and that the infection did … Continue reading Golding, Regina v: CACD 8 May 2014
The defendant appealed from his conviction for manslaughter. He had been found to have prepared heroin by loading it into a syringe and passing it to a friend. Held: Even if ‘the appellant had not himself wielded the syringe, he would have committed an offence under s.23 if he had caused the administration of the … Continue reading Regina v Finlay: CACD 8 Dec 2003
The defendant knew that he had gonorrhea. He had intercourse with his wife, and infected her. She would not have consented had she known. He appealed his convictions for assault and causing grievous bodily harm. Held: ‘The question in this case is whether a man who knows that he has gonorrhea, and who by having … Continue reading Regina v Clarence: CCCR 20 Nov 1888
The defendant had faced trial on terrorist charges. He claimed that delay and the very substantial adverse publicity had made his fair trial impossible, and that it was not an offence for a foreign national to solicit murders to be carried out abroad. Held: The appeal failed. Murder is singled out as an offence even … Continue reading Regina v Abu Hamza: CACD 28 Nov 2006
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Lack of jurisdiction (Art. 8); Preliminary objection rejected (victim); Preliminary objection rejected (six month period); Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); Preliminary objection rejected (out of time); Violation of Art. 10; Not necessary to examine Art. 14+8; Pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings; Costs … Continue reading Open Door and Dublin Well Woman v Ireland: ECHR 29 Oct 1992
The defendant was accused of assault occasioning actual bodily harm when he had made silent phone calls which were taken as threatening. Held: An assault might consist of the making of a silent telephone call in circumstances where it causes fear of immediate and unlawful violence. The court asked how is it to be determined … Continue reading Regina v Burstow, Regina v Ireland: HL 24 Jul 1997
Reckless HIV transmission – Grievous Bodily Harm The defendant appealed against his conviction for inflicting grievous bodily harm. He had HIV/Aids, and was found to have transmitted the disease by intercourse when the victims were not informed of his condition. It was not suggested that any rape had occurred or that he had intended to … Continue reading Regina v Dica: CACD 5 May 2004
The Court concludes that in Northern Ireland:
(i) There is no general right to abortion whether under the common law or under statute.
(ii) The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission (‘the Commission’) has legal standing under the . .
(High Court in Ireland) Hamilton P said: ‘Sections 58 and 59 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 protected and protect the foetus in the womb and having regard to the omission of the words ‘Quick with child’ which were contained in the . .