Category: Crime

London Borough of Croydon v Pinch A Pound (UK) Ltd: Admn 14 Dec 2010

The authority appealed against dismissal of its summons against the defendant accusing it of selling knives unlawfully to purchasers under 18. The magistrates had found that the defendant had exercised due diligence.

Judges:

Pill LJ, Roderick Evans J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 3283 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1988 141A

Crime

Updated: 31 August 2022; Ref: scu.427284

Hamer, Regina v: CACD 17 Aug 2010

Appeal from conviction for assault – good character direction – issue of Penalty Notice for Disorder.
Held: It should not have been put before the jury, but it had not rendered the trial unfair.

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Crim 2053, [2011] 1 Cr App Rep 3, [2011] 1 WLR 528, (2010) 175 JP 19

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.424114

Regina v Coles: CACD 1995

The 15 year old defendant appealed his conviction on the basis of recklessness, challenging, unsuccessfully, the rule in Caldwell.
Held: Because recklessness was to be judged by the standard of the reasonable prudent man, expert evidence of the defendant’s capacity to foresee the risks which would arise from his setting fire to hay in a barn had been rightly excluded and that: ‘unless some factor of the mental health or psychiatric state of the defendant is raised, such evidence is not admissible.’ The court distinguished Silcott, drawing a line between expert evidence going to the reliability of a confession and expert evidence going to mens rea.

Judges:

Hobhouse LJ

Citations:

[1995] 1 Cr App R 157

Statutes:

Criminal Damage Act 1971 1(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Commissioner of Police v Caldwell HL 19-Mar-1981
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 . .
Cited – Regina v Silcot, Raghip and others CACD 9-Dec-1991
There can be an increased readiness of the courts to accept expert evidence as to the defendant’s mental capacity where the issue is as to the admissibility of a confession statement. . .

Cited by:

Applied – Regina v G and R HL 16-Oct-2003
The defendants, young boys, had set fire to paper and thrown the lit papers into a wheelie bin, expecting the fire to go out. In fact substantial damage was caused. The House was asked whether a conviction was proper under the section where the . .
Cited – Henry, Regina v CACD 29-Jun-2005
The defendant appealed his conviction for soliciting to murder and conspiracy to murder. An expert’s opinion now described him as of low intelligence and vulnerable to the sort of pressure of which he complained.
Held: The expert evidence had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.186841

Regina v Baker: CACD 21 Oct 2003

The defendant appealed his conviction for murder. The conviction had been on the basis of there having been a joint enterprise.
Held: ‘The jury were sufficiently directed on the question of intent and we see no risk that they might have misunderstood the time at which intent was to be judged. Conduct immediately following an offence may throw light on a defendant’s state of mind at the time the offence is committed. ‘ An appeal related to an associated robbery succeeded.

Judges:

Lord Justice Pill Mr Justice Royce The Recorder Of Chester

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Crim 2790

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.187017

Mcilwaine v Higson, Procurator Fiscal, Airdrie: HCJ 29 Sep 2000

A child was chased and mauled by a male Bull Mastiff, Winston, which, along with a female dog of the same breed had run out of the appellant’s house on to a grassy area where children were playing. The appellant had chased after the dogs and managed to seize the male dog after it commenced an attack on one of the children. The dog then broke free and bit the child again.
Held: The defendant’s appeal succeeded. This had been one incident: ‘The sheriff considered that this was not a ‘single incident’; by grabbing the dog’s collar, the appellant was seeking to re-establish her control over him and had succeeded in doing so for a brief period of a few seconds. The sheriff sees what followed as effectively a separate incident upon which conviction would be justified, even if it were not justified in relation to the previous stages of the attack. Having regard to the nature of the incident as a whole, both before and after the appellant’s brief and ineffectual hold on Winston’s collar, the Advocate Depute accepted that conviction would not be justified on the basis on the resumed attack alone. We are satisfied that the concession was rightly made, and the whole attack is to be regarded as a single incident’.

Judges:

Lord Prosser and Lord Penrose and Lord Bonomy

Citations:

[2000] ScotHC 94, 2000 GWD 31-1211

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Dangerous Dogs Act 1971 10(3)

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Cited by:

Cited – Thomson v Procurator Fiscal, Peterhead HCJ 16-Dec-2009
The defendant appealed against her conviction for having her dog dangerously out of control in a public place. She said there had been insufficient evidence to justify the finding. The dog was said to had attacked and bitten another dog, and then . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Animals

Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.170653

Regina v Keith Ross: CACD 13 Mar 2001

The defendant having pleaded guilty to a serious drugs offence now appealed a confiscation order. He claimed that he had been misled that the prosecution would not request an inquiry for this purpose, and during the course of the hearing the prosecution changed its mind, and that the defendant having been sentences the section no longer allowed such an inquiry, unless the judge had explicitly postponed the decision.
Held: The Act required a clear indication from the judge that this was his intention. Appeal allowed.

Judges:

Lord Justice Potter Mr Justice Stanley Burnton And The Recorder Of Manchester

Citations:

[2001] 2 Cr App R (S) 109, [2001] EWCA Crim 560

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Drug Trafficking Act 1994 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Rayner CACD 27-Jul-1999
. .

Cited by:

Cited – Guraj, Regina v SC 14-Dec-2016
The defendant had pleaded to charges of possession of drugs with intent to supply. He was sentenced, but then the prosecutor was 14 months’ late serving its notice with regard to the confiscation order under section 16. The crown now appealed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.158751

Regina v Brown (Gregory): HL 9 Feb 1996

The issue was whether ‘data’ within the Data Protection Act 1984 was limited to data in computer-readable form.
Held: The offence of the ‘use’ of protected data required something beyond inspection on a computer screen including printout. There is a tension at inter-state level between the need to protect privacy, and the need for free movement of data between states. Lord Goff held that retrieval of the information would not of itself be ‘using’ the information so retrieved: ‘It would simply be transferring the information into a different form.’

Judges:

Lord Hoffmann, Lord Goff

Citations:

Gazette 13-Mar-1996, Independent 13-Feb-1996, Times 09-Feb-1996, [1996] AC 543, [1996] 1 All ER 545

Statutes:

Data Protection Act 1984 5(2)(b) 5(3)(5)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Durant v Financial Services Authority CA 8-Dec-2003
The appellant had been unsuccessful in litigation against his former bank. The Financial Services Authority had subsequently investigated his complaint against the bank. Using section 7 of the Data Protection Act 1998, he requested disclosure of his . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Bignall Admn 16-May-1997
The defendant police officers had obtained information from the Police National Computer, but had used it for improper purposes.
Held: The prosecution should have taken place under the 1990 Act as unauthorised access, and had not been used . .
Cited – Regina v Fellows, Arnold CACD 27-Sep-1996
Computer based digital images are ‘copies of a photograph’ sufficient for the Act, and so possession of digital entities capable of being transformed into images were such photographs. Making a file available for download, was sufficient to amount . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Information, Crime

Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.86239

Regina v Vincent: CACD 13 Mar 2001

Where a hotel guest achieved an arrangement with the hotel management, so that they did not expect payment as he left, that was enough to defeat an allegation that he had made off without payment. This applied even if the agreement was obtained by deception. The section permitted no analysis of the motives or beliefs underlying the agreement which set aside the normal expectation.

Citations:

Times 13-Mar-2001, Gazette 05-Apr-2001

Statutes:

Theft Act 1978 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.88697

Ahmed v Regina: CACD 14 Dec 2010

The defendant appealed against his conviction saying that the reputation of the forensic expert on whose evidence it had been based had been severely damaged.
Held: Although the information relating to Dr Heath was ‘deeply concerning . . to anyone connected with the administration of criminal justice’ there was no reason to doubt the safety of the conviction in the particular case.

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Crim 2899

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Noye, Kenneth, Regina v CACD 22-Mar-2011
The prisoner appealed against his conviction for murder on reference from the CCRC. There were new doubts about the reliabiity of the expert forensic expert.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. Dr H’s evidence did not impinge on the essential . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 28 August 2022; Ref: scu.427192

Belton, Regina v: CACD 9 Nov 2010

The appellant had, after a ruling by the judge, pleaded guilty to a charge that ‘while acting as a public officer, namely a member of the Independent Monitoring Board, wilfully misconducted herself by developing personal and inappropriate relationships with serving prisoners at HMP Parkhurst.’ She had been a volunteer and appealed saying that as such she did not hold a public office.
Held: Remuneration was not an indispensable requirement for the holding of a public office, or for liability to prosecution for the offence of misconduct in a public office. The appeal failed.

Judges:

Gros LJ, Holroyde J, Mettyear Rec

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Crim 2857, [2011] 2 WLR 1434, [2011] 1 Cr App Rep 20, [2011] QB 934, [2011] 1 All ER 700

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Mitchell, Regina v CACD 12-Feb-2014
‘Is a paramedic employed by a National Health Service Trust in its ambulance service the holder of a public office so as to be subject to criminal sanction for misconduct?’
Held: The appeal succeeded; he was not: ‘the nature of the duty . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 28 August 2022; Ref: scu.427190

Al Hassan-Daniel and Another v HM Revenue and Customs and Another: CA 15 Dec 2010

Suspected of having ingested bags of cocaine, the deceased had been arrested on arrival at the airport. He refused all liquids and foods, but after a week, he died of acute cocaine poisoning. His wife sought damages alleging human rights infringement, and the defendant sought to strike out the claim under ex turpi causa non oritur actio. His family appealed direct from the county court.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The defence of ex turpi causs could not be applied in a human rights case.

Judges:

Lord Neuberger MR, Maurice Kay VP, Sedley LLJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 1443, [2011] HRLR 9, [2011] 2 WLR 488, [2011] 2 All ER 31, [2011] UKHRR 1

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Human Rights, Torts – Other, Crime

Updated: 28 August 2022; Ref: scu.427168

Burridge v Regina: CACD 2 Dec 2010

The defendant appealed against his conviction for the murder of his infant son. There had been considerable expert medical evidence called, but only by the prosecution.
Held: The court considered the basis upon which new evidence could be admitted on appeal.

Judges:

Leveson LJ, Irwin, Holroyde JJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Crim 2847

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Henderson v Regina CACD 17-Jun-2010
The court considered appeals against convictions for homicide of infants by carers.
Held: There is no room for trial by expert and in many cases the evidence including the expert evidence, may be insufficient to exclude beyond reasonable doubt . .

Cited by:

Cited – Noye, Kenneth, Regina v CACD 22-Mar-2011
The prisoner appealed against his conviction for murder on reference from the CCRC. There were new doubts about the reliabiity of the expert forensic expert.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. Dr H’s evidence did not impinge on the essential . .
Cited – Dizaei v Regina CACD 16-May-2011
The defendant had been convicted of misconduct in a public office and doing acts with intent to pervert the course of justice. He now appealed saying that he could demonstrate that the principal witness was dishonest. The prosecution replied that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 28 August 2022; Ref: scu.426772

Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead, Regina (on The Application of) v The East Berkshire Justices: Admn 21 Oct 2010

The court was asked whether a grapefruit knife was a knife within section 141A. The magistrates were not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the article was a knife because it had a curved blade designed specifically for a single use and because it was distinct or different from a usual straight bladed instrument that in general usage characterises a knife. They also referred to the supplier’s evidence about the understanding of those who supply and market these instruments.
Held: ‘this grapefruit knife is a cutting instrument consisting of a blade with a sharpened longitudinal edge – it has two such edges in fact – fixed in a handle, and in my judgment it is a knife within section 141A(2) of the 1988 Act. ‘

Judges:

Sir Anthony May P

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 3020 (Admin), [2011] 1 Cr App R 21

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1988 141A

Crime

Updated: 28 August 2022; Ref: scu.426728

Keane and Another, Regina v: CACD 19 Oct 2010

The court considered the effect upon the common law concept of self-defence of the statutory intervention made by section 76 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008.
Held: It was not the purpose of the section to change the common law but to specify in statutory form some of the requirements upon a tribunal considering self-defence.
Hughes LJ made it clear that although the court intended to make some general observations it could not provide a comprehensive survey of the whole of the law of self-defence so as to deal with the exigencies of all cases. He described ‘the basic building blocks’ of the large proportion of cases in which self-defence is raised. The first stage of the jury’s consideration is to decide what happened to cause the defendant to use the violence he did. The facts must be established by application of the criminal burden and standard of proof. Second, if the defendant claims that something happened which caused him to act as he did, but the jury find it did not, the jury must resolve the question whether the defendant genuinely believed in the circumstances he asserted. If he did then the jury must judge his conduct against the circumstances as he honestly believed them to be, unless his erroneous belief was the result of voluntarily taken drink or drugs. The third stage of the analysis is: ‘ Once it has thus been decided on what factual basis the defendant’s actions are to be judged, either because they are the things that actually happened and he knew them or because he genuinely believed in them even if they did not occur, then the remaining and critical question for the jury is: was his response reasonable, or proportionate (which means the same thing)? Was it reasonable (or proportionate) in all the circumstances? Unlike the earlier stages which may involve the belief of the defendant being the governing factor, the reasonableness of his response on the assumed basis of fact is a test solely for the jury and not for him. In resolving it the jury must usually take into consideration what are often referred to as the ‘agony of the moment’ factors. That means that the jury must be reminded when it rises, as it very often does, that there is in a confrontation no opportunity for the kind of hindsight or debate which can take place months afterwards in court. The defendant must act on the instant, at any rate in a large number of cases. If he does so, and does no more than seems honestly and instinctively to be necessary, that is itself strong evidence that it was reasonable. It is strong evidence, not conclusive evidence. Whilst the jury’s attention must be directed to these factors if they arise, the jury must also be made to understand that the decision of what is a reasonable response is not made by the defendant, it is made by the jury. We should perhaps add that ‘in all the circumstances’ means what it says. There can be no exhaustive catalogue of the events, human reactions and other circumstances which may affect the reasonableness or proportionality of what the defendant did. That is explicitly recognised by section 76 (8).’

Judges:

Hughes LJ, VP, Owen and Roderick Evans JJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Crim 2514, [2011] Crim LR 393

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 76

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Press and Another v Regina CACD 24-Oct-2013
Three defendants appealed against their convictions of assault. One defendant argued that the court did not direct the jury as to the effect of intoxication and/or post-traumatic stress disorder upon the issue of intent, and as to whether and to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 27 August 2022; Ref: scu.426486

Regina v Montilla, Newbury etc: CACD 3 Nov 2003

The Crown appealed a decision that a conviction under subsection 2 required proof that the money the disposal of which the defendant was accused to have assisted was in fact the proceeds of drug trafficking.
Held: Subsections 1 and 2 were clearly differently worded. Under section 1 it was necessary to prove that the goods were the proceeds of trafficking, but subsection 2 was addressed to the state of mind of the defendant, and included no such requirement. The judge had been wrong to import one.

Judges:

Scott Baker LJ, Jackson, Hunt JJ

Citations:

Times 12-Nov-2003, [2003] CAR 36

Statutes:

Drug Trafficking Act 1994 49(1) 49(2), Criminal Justice Act 1988 31

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – M, Regina v; Regina v Z; Regina v I; Regina v R; Regina v B (No 2) CACD 27-Apr-2007
The defendants, accused of offences under the 2000 Act, appealed an interim finding that documents stored on computers could amount to ‘articles’ within the Act. They said that the existence of sections 57 and 58 suggested two distinct regimes, one . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 27 August 2022; Ref: scu.188682

Regina v Davies (Derrick): CACD 6 Nov 2003

The defendant was convicted of having in his possession goods bearing a a sign identical to or likely to be mistaken for a registered trademark. A confiscation order was made, which he now appealed.
Held: Under section 71, a person benefitted from the offence if he obtained property as a result of or inconnection with its offence. The defendant asserted that there had not been a qualifying offence. There had been. The offences were motivated by the desire for gain. In this case the goods were property, and had been acquired in connection with the commission of the offence. There were in fact two qualifying offences here, and the appeal failed.

Judges:

Waller LJ, Hughes J, Dame Heather Steel

Citations:

Times 21-Nov-2003

Statutes:

Proceeds of Crime Act 1995 2, Criminal Justice Act 1988 71

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Intellectual Property, Crime

Updated: 27 August 2022; Ref: scu.188244

Re S 36 Criminal Justice Act 1972; Attorney General’s Reference No 1 of 2002: CACD 14 Oct 2002

The court was asked: ‘Whether the common-law offence of perverting the course of public justice is committed where false evidence is given or made, not to defeat what the witness believes to be the ends of justice, or not to procure what the witness believes to be a false verdict.’ Photographs had been taken of a burglary, but the photographer was unidentified and did not wish to become involved, having left the photographs at the complainant’s house. The defendant police officer was said to have given a statement taylored to avoid the photographer being identified. The judge had held that she had not manufactured evidence and directed a not guilty verdict.
Held: The authorities demonstrated a distinction between the course and ends of justice and it is the course which matters for the purpose of this offence. It should have been left to the jury: ‘Whether or not her motive in making the false statement which she undoubtedly made, and in persuading the witness M to make the false statement which he undoubtedly made, was, at first sight, a laudable one of protecting the elderly neighbour; and whether or not, if that was the motive, that bore upon her intention in making those false statements, were eminently, as it seems to us, matters for consideration by the jury. The fact that a police officer had made a false statement and had persuaded a lay witness to make a false statement and had, in the course of interviewing a suspect, made a false statement to him, were, as it seems to us, each capable of giving rise to the inference that there was the necessary intention to pervert the course of justice. ‘

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Crim 2392

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1972 36, Criminal Appeal (Reference of Points of Law) Rules 1973

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Vreones 1891
It was alleged that the defendant had tampered with a sample of wheat to be used in an arbitration, and he was accused of perverting the course of justice.
Held: Perverting the course of justice is a common law offence covering a wide variety . .
Cited – Regina v Lalani CACD 22-Jan-1999
In prosecuting a juror for acts intended to pervert the course of justice, it must be shown not only that the juror spoke to the defendant about the matter, but that the juror intended to interfere with justice or the nature of the communication did . .
Cited – Regina v Kellett CACD 1976
The defendant saw disparaging statements made about him by neighbours in the course of divorce proceedings. He wrote to them and asked them to withdraw the statements they had made and threatened proceedings for slander. He was charged with . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 27 August 2022; Ref: scu.189037

Regina v Wadland: CACD 18 Nov 1993

The defendant appealed against his conviction for causing a public nuisance, having made substantial numbers of obscene telephone calls to women.
Held: The conviction stood

Judges:

Glidewell LJ

Citations:

Unreported, 18 November 1993

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 27 August 2022; Ref: scu.188882

Regina v Morris and King: CACD 1984

The court was asked to say what was required to be shown in deciding whether an object had the appearance of a firearm.
Held: The court rejected an objective test, saying: ‘In considering whether or not the thing looked like a firearm at that time, the jury are entitled to have regard to the evidence of any witnesses who actually saw the thing at that time, together with their own observation of the thing itself, if they have seen it.’

Judges:

Dunn LJ

Citations:

(1984) 79 Cr App R 104

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 27 August 2022; Ref: scu.188704

Regina v Shorrock: CACD 1993

The defendants used land for an unauthorised ‘acid party’ which caused substantial inconvenience and disruption to neighbours. The defendant denied that he had had the requisite knowledge to be criminally liable.
Held: This was capable of amounting to the crime of public nuisance. An act of public nuisance can give rise to both civil (through a relator action) and criminal liability. The court considered what was the necessary mens rea for the offence of public nuisance, and applied Sedleigh-Denfield, saying (Rattee LJ) that he was guilty ‘if either he knew or he ought to have known, in the sense that the means of knowledge were available to him, that there was a real risk that the consequences of the licence granted by him in respect of his field would be to create the sort of nuisance that in fact occurred’.

Judges:

Rattee LJ, Simon Brown LJ and Popplewell J

Citations:

[1993] 98 Cr App R 67, [1994] QB 279

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Sedleigh-Denfield v O’Callaghan HL 24-Jun-1940
Occupier Responsible for Nuisance in adopting it
A trespasser laid a drain along a ditch on the defendant’s land. Later the defendants came to use the drain themselves. A grate was misplaced by them so that in a heavy rainstorm, it became clogged with leaves, and water flowed over into the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Goldstein, Rimmington v Regina CACD 28-Nov-2003
Two defendants appealed in respect of alleged offences under common law of causing a public nuisance. One had sent race hatred material, and the other bomb hoaxes, through the post. Both claimed that the offence was so ill defined as to be an . .
Cited – Regina v Rimmington; Regina v Goldstein HL 21-Jul-2005
Common Law – Public Nuisance – Extent
The House considered the elements of the common law offence of public nuisance. One defendant faced accusations of having sent racially offensive materials to individuals. The second was accused of sending an envelope including salt to a friend as a . .
Cited – Rose vDirector of Public Prosecutions Admn 16-Mar-2006
The defendant appealed his conviction for outraging public decency by behaving in an indecent manner contrary to common law. He had been in the foyer of a bank at night with a girl who performed oral sex. The action could have been seen, but was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Nuisance, Crime

Updated: 27 August 2022; Ref: scu.188880

Regina v Humphreys: CACD 1995

Defence of provocation to murder. Abnormal immaturity and attention seeking by wrist slashing were mental characteristics which should have been left for the jury to decide upon.

Citations:

[1995] 4 All ER 1008

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Weller, Regina v CACD 26-Mar-2003
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder, saying that provocation should have been found. The issue was whether or not, in the course of his summing-up, the trial judge should have left, and if so whether he had left, to the jury the . .
Cited – Luc Thiet Thuan v The Queen PC 2-Apr-1996
(Hong Kong) On a trial for murder the defendant relied on the defences of diminished responsibility and provocation. Medical evidence showed the defendant suffered from brain damage and was prone to respond to minor provocation by losing his . .
Cited – Regina v Parker CACD 25-Feb-1997
The defendant appealed his conviction for murder, saying that his defence of provocation should have been left for the jury.
Held: Not following Luc, it was open to admit relevant evidence on the defendant’s capacity for self-control. Having . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 27 August 2022; Ref: scu.188894

Browbank v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 24 Feb 2003

Appeal by case stated against conviction for theft. Operating a cash register, he had been accused of making fraudulent refunds.
Held: The evidence had been sufficient to support the conviction.

Judges:

McCombe J

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 375 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Theft Act 1968 1 7

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 27 August 2022; Ref: scu.184955

Regina v Gunawardena: CACD 1990

At the preparatory hearing the defendants sought an order that the trial be stayed as an abuse of process on the grounds of unjustifiable delay. Held : It was refused. ‘In our judgment the words of sections 7, 8 and 9 themselves plainly demonstrate the object of Parliament in creating the preparatory hearing. It must have been, according to the language used, we think, the intention of parliament in introducing this novel procedure – novel in that it has not been introduced in respect of any other kind of criminal trial – to ensure that it be used for a specific purpose or purposes. It deliberately so enacted, in our view, the provisions of subsection (1) of section 7 in order to make it clear that it was creating this new and very valuable procedure for the specified purposes and no other. We cannot bring ourselves to believe that Parliament can possibly, by using the clear words which they have used in sections 7 and 9, to allow a preparatory hearing to commence for a certain specified purpose have intended to permit, once a preparatory hearing for that purpose is in being, argument to range around all manner of issues which cannot be said to relate to any of the specified purposes.’

Judges:

Watkins LJ

Citations:

[1990] 91 Cr App R 55

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Followed – Regina v Moore CACD 5-Feb-1991
The court considered whether to quash a count of theft: ‘The fact that a possible incidental effect of the purposes of the application does find itself within those sub-provisions (a) to (d) is not one of the purposes of those provisions. It is the . .
Cited – Regina v Van Hoogstraten CACD 12-Dec-2003
The prosecution appealed against the refusal of the crown court to remit the case for retrial.
Held: The court had no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal against this ruling because it was not within the ambit of section 29(2) of the 1996 Act. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 27 August 2022; Ref: scu.188774

Adams v The Queen: PC 4 Nov 1994

(New Zealand) The defendant had been a managing director of Equitcorp. With other directors he was concerned with the company’s investments, and established a series of other companies and banks to hide fraudulent transactions. Equitcorp became insolvent, and he was charged with conspiracy to defraud.
Held: D’s appeal against conviction failed. On a charge of conspiracy to defraud causing economic loss, it was necessary to show prejudice or actual loss to the alleged victim. Since the company was entitled to secret profits made by a director, and the transaction had been designed to hide the assets from the company, the acts impeding the discovery of the transaction could found the conspiracy to defraud allegation, and he was properly convicted. His failure as a company director to disclose information which was lawfully required from him as to his secret profit, could itself amount to a fraud.

Citations:

Ind Summary 09-Jan-1995, Gazette 25-Jan-1995, Times 04-Nov-1994, [1995] 1 WLR 52

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Governor of Pentonville Prison, Ex parte Tarling HL 1978
The Government of Singapore sought Mr Tarling’s extradition inter alia on two charges of conspiring in Hong Kong to steal shares in a Hong Kong company, the property of a Singapore Company.
Held: a conspiracy in Hong Kong to steal shares in a . .
Cited – Wai Yutsang v The Queen PC 14-Oct-1991
(Hong Kong) The defendant was chief accountant in a bank. He caused to be made false entries to fail to reflect the dishonouring of substantial cheques. He was charged alone on an allegation of conspiracy. His defence was that he merely obeyed the . .
Cited – Scott v Metropolitan Police Commissioner; Regina v Scott HL 20-Nov-1974
The defendant had been accused of conspiracy to produce pirate copies of films obtained by purchasing copies from cinema owners without the knowledge or consent of the copyright owners.
Held: To establish a conspiracy to defraud, it was not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Company

Updated: 27 August 2022; Ref: scu.77648

Mangal Singh v The King-Emperor (Lahore): PC 19 Feb 1937

The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder and against his sentence of death.
Held: The appeal failed. Though the evidence was largely circumstantial, there was sufficient to allow the court to find the offence proved. It was not part of the duty of the Board to sit as a court of Criminal Appeal but only to correct a perceived miscarriage of justice.

Judges:

Alness L, Sir Shadi Lal, Sir George Rankin

Citations:

[1937] UKPC 24

Links:

Bailii

Commonwealth, Crime, Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 27 August 2022; Ref: scu.426090

Le Vine v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 6 May 2010

The appellant had been charged with, and convicted of, an offence contrary to section 4A(1) of the 1986 Act. He had allegedly gone into the laundry room in the basement of the sheltered accommodation where he and the complainant and others each had self-contained flats, shouting obscenities at the complainant. The Divisional Court dismissed his appeal from the magistrates’ court and upheld his conviction. The crucial question, the court concluded, was whether the laundry room could properly be described as part of a structure which was occupied as part of the appellant’s home. It held not. The laundry room was a communal room shared by those who lived in several homes in the building, but could not be regarded as part of the structure of any individual home.

Judges:

Elias LJ, Keith J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 1128 (Admin), (2010) 174 JP 337

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Public Order Act 1986 4A(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.426044

Joseph v Regina: CACD 11 Nov 2010

In 2004, the defendant had been convicted of murder. He now appealed saying that advanced in the analysis of gunshot residues would make the forensic evidence then given now unreliable.
Held: At trial the forensic experts had made concessions which would have been appropriate now. The jury had not been misled.

Judges:

Pitchford LJ, Sweeney, Slade JJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Crim 2580

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – George v Regina CACD 15-Nov-2007
The defendant appealed against his conviction for the murder of the BBC presenter Jill Dando. He said that the prosecution had relied heavily on the discovery, a year later, of a single particle of firearm discharge residue.
Held: The evidence . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.425944

Regina v Nguyen: CACD 18 Mar 2008

The defendant was accused of one serious assault, but suspected of two. He appealed his conviction after the judge had refused to exclude evidence of the first assault as evidence of bad character.
Held: The evidence of the defendant talking of the other incident was relevant as to his character and readiness to commit the offence at issue. The mere failure of the CPS to prosecute for the other incident did not operate to exclude any evidence of it.

Judges:

Lord Justice Dyson, Mr Justice Maddison and Sir Richard Curtis

Citations:

Times 16-May-2008

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 2003 101(1)(d)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.272266

Latham v Northampton Magistrates’ Court: Admn 6 Feb 2008

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 245 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Percy, Regina (on the Application of) v Corby Magistrates’ Court Admn 7-Feb-2008
The claimant sought judicial review of a decision of the magistrates not to issue summonses against two police officers. She had been demonstrating near a US base, but had refused to intervene and allowed a US officer to unlawfully arrest and detain . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Magistrates

Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.266036