Category: Crime

Regina v Mustaq: CACD 2005

It is unlawful for a court, as a public authority for the purposes of s. 6(3) of the 1998 Act, to act in a way incompatible with defendant’s rights enshrined in article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

Judges:

Lord Roger

Citations:

[2005] 2 Cr Ap R 32

Statutes:

Human Rights Act 1998 6(3), European Convention on Human Rights 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Hammerton v Hammerton CA 23-Mar-2007
The husband appealed against his committal for contempt of a court order in family proceedings. The court had heard the wife’s application for his committal at the same time as his application for contact with the children.
Held: The appeal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Human Rights

Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.250483

Regina v Massey: CACD 19 Oct 2007

The defendant appealed his conviction for the offence of controlling a prostitute for gain.
Held: The appeal failed. ‘Control’ in this context did not require the defendant to be shown to have compelled or otherwise coerced the prostitution. ‘Control’ included but was not limited to compulsion, and could be exercised in many ways. The offence had a broad meaning.

Citations:

Times 04-Dec-2007

Statutes:

Sexual Offences Act 2003 53(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.261774

Regina v R (Gloves, Offensive Weapon): CACD 15 Nov 2007

The defendant was charged with possessing an offensive weapon. He had been wearing combat gloves which had powdered lead or sand in patches over the knuckle area. The prosecutor appealed a finding that such articles could not be an offensive weapon.
Held: The gloves had been advertised as for use for self defence. That and their construction made them an offensive weapon. There was a case to answer.

Citations:

Times 03-Jan-2008

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 2003 58

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.263547

Regina v Gittens: CACD 1984

Lord Lane set out the directions to be given to a jury on the defence of diminished responsibility: ‘Where a defendant suffers from an abnormality of mind arising from arrested or retarded development or inherent causes or induced by disease or injury and has also taken drink before the killing, the abnormality of mind and the effect of the drink may each play a part in impairing the defendant’s mental responsibility for the killing. The task for the jury is to decide whether, despite the disinhibiting effect of the drink on the defendant’s mind, the abnormality of mind arising from a cause specified in subsection 2(1) nevertheless substantially impaired his mental responsibility for his fatal acts. Accordingly it is not correct for the judge to direct the jury that unless they are satisfied that if the defendant had not taken drink he would have killed, the defence of diminished responsibility must fail. Such a direction is incorrect because it fails to recognise that the abnormality of mind arising from a cause specified in the subsection and the effect of the drink may each play a part in impairing the defendant’s mental responsibility for the killing.’

Judges:

Lord Lane CJ

Citations:

[1984] QB 698, [1984] Crim LR 554

Statutes:

Homicide Act 1957 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Approved – Fenton, Regina v 1975
The defendant had shot four people in two different locations. He suffered a number of conditions, including paranoid psychopathy, which raised the possibility of diminished responsibility, although the jury had rejected that defence. He now . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Dietschmann HL 27-Feb-2003
Voluntary drunkenness No Diminished Responsibility
The defendant had been convicted of murder. At the time of the assault, he was both intoxicated to the point of losing his inhibitions and was also suffering an abnormality of mind sufficient substantially to reduce his mental responsibility.
Cited – Hendy, Regina v CACD 12-Apr-2006
The applicant was sentenced to life imprisonment in 1992 for a brutal murder. He had pleaded diminished responsibility. There were now no papers from the trial. Medical evidence now suggested that at the time of the trial he would have suffered a . .
Cited – Dowds v Regina CACzD 22-Feb-2012
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder, saying that he should have been allowed to rely on a plea of diminished responsibility given the changes to section 2 of the 1957 Act introduced in 2009. He said that his alcoholism should . .
Cited – Regina v Egan CACD 1992
The court considered the appropriate directions to a jury in diminished responsibility defence to murder charge.
Watkins LJ said: ‘In R v Lloyd . . directions as to the word ‘substantial’, to the effect that (1) the jury should approach the . .
Cited – Golds, Regina v SC 30-Nov-2016
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder, saying that he should have been only convicted of manslaughter, applying the new test for diminished responsibility as provided under the 1957 Act as amended, and particularly whether the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.179633

Regina v McKoy: CACD 29 May 2002

A police officer attended a domestic incident. Not intending to arrest the husband, he nevertheless placed his hand on the defendant to restrain him. The defendant, believing he was being arrested, struggled to escape and the officer was injured.
Held: The judge had misdirected the jury. If, in fact, the restraint was unlawful, then the defendant was entitled to use reasonable force to escape from it. The fact that he believed that the restraint was a lawful arrest did not affect that right.

Judges:

Lord Justice Kay, Mr Justice Andrew Smith and Judge Colston, QC

Citations:

Times 17-Jun-2002

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime, Police

Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.173990

Scarsbrook or Galbraith v Her Majesty’s Advocate (No.2): HCJ 21 Jun 2001

The court considered the defence of diminished responsibility to a charge of murder.
Held: Lord Rodger of Earlsferry: ‘It is, of course, impossible to attempt to describe the ambit of the doctrine of diminished responsibility without even attempting to describe the operation of the doctrine itself. A common theme in the cases where judges have left the issue to the jury is that they involve some abnormality of the accused’s mind. While philosophers continue to debate the timeless questions – about the nature of the relationship between mind and body and about the extent to which individuals have control over their actions – our law proceeds on the basis that an adult person of sound mind has sufficient control over his acts, and over his omissions to act, as to be responsible for them in law. Criminal acts and omissions are punished accordingly.’ The court saw nothing unjust in attributing the same responsibility for the purposes of the civil law as was attributed for the purposes of the criminal law. One had to assume that the individual was a reasonably well-informed and reasonably responsible member of the public.

Judges:

Lord Bonomy and Lord Penrose and Lord Nimmo Smith and Lady Cosgrove and Lord Justice General

Citations:

[2001] ScotHC 45, 2002 JC 1, 2001 SCCR 551, 2001 GWD 25-924, 2001 SLT 953

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

See Also – Scarsbrook Or Galbraith v Her Majesty’s Advocate HCJ 7-Jun-2001
. .
See Also – Scarsbrook or Galbraith v Her Majesty’s Advocate HCJ 7-Sep-2000
The purpose of orders under the section is to deal with reports of proceedings which are fair and accurate, but which should nonetheless be postponed, not with other material the publication of which might constitute a contempt of Court. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Golds, Regina v SC 30-Nov-2016
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder, saying that he should have been only convicted of manslaughter, applying the new test for diminished responsibility as provided under the 1957 Act as amended, and particularly whether the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.170581

Metcalf v Crown Prosecution Service: Admn 22 Apr 2015

Police officers had attended an address following reports of a domestic disturbance between the appellant and another. Both men were arrested. The appellant objected as the other individual was escorted away by the two officers and placed in the back of a police car. He tried to block the officers’ way and was repeatedly told to stop interfering and to move away. He tried to open the rear door of the police car and to stick his head into the vehicle. At one point, one of the officers attempted to stop the appellant speaking to the other man by barring his way and then by pushing him out of the way. At trial, the appellant made a submission of no case to answer on the basis that the officer had assaulted him when he pushed him. He argued that the officer’s alleged unlawful conduct meant that he was not acting in the execution of his duty, with the consequence that the appellant’s own conduct could not amount to obstruction.
Held: The appeal failed. The push had not been unlawful
Burnett LJ said: ‘The task upon which PC Upshon was engaged, both before and after the push, was in securing one of the arrested men by placing and keeping him in the police car with a view to transporting him to a police station. The officer and his colleague were also engaged in a more general sense in seeking to keep the peace. These aspects encompass the ‘duty’ PC Upshon was in the process of executing.
In my judgment it matters not whether the push was lawful or unlawful in determining the answer to the question whether the appellant was wilfully obstructing PC Upshon in the execution of his duty. The push clearly had no bearing on the question whether the appellant’s conduct before that time amounted to wilful obstruction. On the findings of the magistrates it did. I am unable to see how an unlawful push could retrospectively render conduct lawful, which was otherwise criminal. But equally, if the push were unlawful it does not follow that PC Upshon was any the less acting in the course of the execution of his duty thereafter in dealing with the arrested man in the car. Even on that hypothesis, a person who has been assaulted by a police officer is not liberated from the application of the criminal law prohibiting wilful obstruction of a constable (including that constable) in the execution of his duty. The assault itself could not be characterised as being part of the execution of the officer’s duty. That is why Fraser Wood was entitled to resist when he was restrained. But he would not, for example, have been entitled to block the officers with a view to preventing them making a lawful arrest, dealing with an incident of disorder or executing a search warrant. That would have amounted to wilful obstruction of the officers in the execution of their duty. So too here, even if the appellant was the victim of an assault it provides him with no defence to a charge of obstructing the officer in the execution of his duty regarding the arrested man in the car.’

Judges:

Burnett LJ and Stewart J

Citations:

[2015] EWHC 1091 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – McCann v Crown Prosecution Service Admn 21-Aug-2015
Appeal by case stated against conviction for obstructing a police officer in the execution of his duty. The appellant had been protesting. She, correctly, thought the land to be a rivate highway. The police officer had thought it a public hghway and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Police

Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.545872

Williams, Regina v: CACD 2 Nov 2010

The offence of causing death by driving while unlicensed, disqualified or uninsured, is committed if the driver is unlicensed, disqualified or uninsured and if the driving is a cause of death in the sense that it was ‘more than negligible or de minimis’. It was not an element of the offence that the defendant’s driving had to exhibit any fault contributing to the accident. It had held, moreover, that it was enough that the defendant was uninsured, or without full licence, and that his car had been involved in the fatal collision.

Judges:

Thomas LJ, Silber LJ, Wadsworth QC

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Crim 2552, [2011] 1 WLR 588, (2010) 174 JP 606

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Road Safety Act 2006 3ZB, Road Traffic Act 1988 3ZB

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Foster v Bon Groundwork Ltd EAT 17-Mar-2011
EAT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Striking-out/dismissal
In April 2009, the Claimant, who was then 77 years of age, was employed by the Respondent, when he was laid off without pay. While still being employed by . .
Cited – Hughes, Regina v SC 31-Jul-2013
Uninsured Driver Not Guilty of Causing Death
The appellant though an uninsured driver, was driving without fault when another vehicle veered across the road. The other driver died from his injuries, and the appellant convicted of causing his death whilst uninsured. At trial he succeeded in . .
Cited – Taylor, Regina v SC 3-Feb-2016
No Liability Extension on Taking Without Consent
Appeal by leave of the Court of Appeal on a point of law arising in the course of the trial of the appellant for aggravated vehicle taking, contrary to section 12A of the Theft Act 1968. The defendant had taken a vehicle without the owner’s consent, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Road Traffic

Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.425642

B, Regina v: CACD 10 Dec 2009

Application for leave to appeal against sentence said to be unduly lenient. The defendant had been convicted of murder and other very serious offences of violence arising from one incident. He had been sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum of 16 years.
Held: 25 year minimum substituted: ‘this was a remorseless killing of a defenceless boy — not much more than a lad — as he lay asleep. It was carried out deliberately. That offence, together with the associated offences of attempted murder and wounding with intent on the wife and daughter respectively, after he had deliberately killed their son and brother, mean that, despite the absence of any of the features expressly identified in paragraph 5 of Schedule 21, this was a case of particularly high seriousness. But whether that is so or not, and assuming that the starting point was that taken by the judge, the offence was aggravated in the extreme by the circumstances of the associated offences and by the facts of the offences as we have endeavoured to summarise them in the course of this judgment. We cannot ignore the fact that the victim died in circumstances of extreme vulnerability. Further, there was an attempt to kill the wife which failed because of the courage of her daughter who stepped in and took the blows that were intended to kill her mother.’

Judges:

Lord Judge LCJ, Simon, Royce JJ

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Crim 2701

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.425519

Blench v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 5 Nov 2004

The defendant appealed against his conviction for assaulting a police officer in the execution of his duty under section 89. He had argued that he had no case to answer. The officers had received an emergency call to the house, but the female caller had told them then not to come. On arrival, the defendant had told them to get off his property. Fearing violence to a child, the police used CS gas to obtain entry under the 1984 Act and arrested him for breach of the peace.
Held: The appeal failed. The police had information that a child was at risk. They had the power under the 1984 Act to enter to investigate that matter, and their actions were lawful. Since their actions were under the 1984 Act, the questions detailed in Bibby, which dealt with the use of common law powers, did not arise.

Judges:

Thomas LJ, Fulford J

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 2717 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Police Act 1996 89, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984
17(1)(e)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Bibby v Chief Constable of Essex Police CA 6-Apr-2000
A bailiff sought to execute against goods in a shop against the will of the occupier. The police attended and when tempers were raised the police officer anticipated a breach of the peace by the bailiff and arrested him. He sought damages for that . .
Cited – Albert v Lavin HL 3-Dec-1981
An off duty and out of uniform police officer attempted to restrain the defendant jumping ahead of a bus queue. The defendant struggled, and continued to do so even after being told that of the officer’s status. He said he had not believed that he . .
Cited – Laporte, Regina (on the Application of) v Gloucestershire Constabulary and others Admn 19-Feb-2004
The court considered a claim for judicial review of a police officer’s decision to turn back a number of coaches. Each coach contained passengers en route to join a demonstration at an RAF base in Gloucestershire, the officer honestly and reasonably . .
Cited – Snook v Mannion QBD 1982
The police officer refused to leave premises after being told to ‘Fuck off’.
Held: Whether such words amounted to a withdrawal of the officer’s licence to be on the land was a question of fact in the circumstances. . .
Cited – Davis v Lisle CA 1936
Two police officers, one in plain clothes and the other in uniform, passed by a lorry causing an obstruction in the highway outside a garage. Two men were repairing it. Some minutes later they returned and saw that the lorry had been moved into the . .
Cited – Riley v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 1990
A police officer is not acting in the execution of his duty by arresting or detaining someone unless that arrest or detention is lawful. Justices are not entitled to infer that a police officer was acting in the course of his duty in carrying out a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Police

Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.425319

Dorset County Council v House: CACD 13 Oct 2010

The defendant appealed against his convictions after selling cattle without eartags and failing to give proper notifications of cattle movements.

Judges:

Toulson LJ, Maddison, Hickinbottom JJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Crim 2270

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Cattle Identification Regulations 1998 (1998 SI No 871), Cattle Database Regulations 1998 (1998 SI No 1796) 5(1), Trade Descriptions Act 1968 1(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime, Agriculture

Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.425198

Splain, Regina v: CACD 12 Jan 2010

The defendant appealed against an order made for payment of all the prosecutor’s costs in full on his conviction for only some of the trade mark offences prosecuted against him.
Held: Where a defendant has been convicted on only some of several counts, it is wrong to order him to pay the whole of the prosecution costs. However, a mathematical approach was not required

Judges:

Maurice Kay LJ, David Clarke, Sharp JJ

Citations:

[2010] Cost L 465, [2010] EWCA Crim 49

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Trade Marks Act 1994

Citing:

Cited – B and Q Plc, Regina v CACD 27-Sep-2005
The defendant company appealed against its conviction for a breach of the 1974 Act, arising from a fatal accident to a customer at retail premises. There had been a substantial contested trial. The appellants were convicted of some of the counts on . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Intellectual Property

Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.425194

Zahid v Regina: CACD 5 Oct 2010

The defendant appealed against his conviction for possession of expanding ammunition, on the judge ruling that the offence was one of strict liability.

Judges:

Hooper, Flaux, Spencer LJJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Crim 2158

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Firearms Act 1968 5(1A)(f)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Deyemi and Another, Regina v CACD 13-Aug-2007
After a judge’s ruling as to strict liability for the possession of a prohibited weapon, the defendants pleaded guilty. They now appealed against conviction. The judge had sentenced them on the basis that liability for possession was strict.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.424867

In Re Sidney Levien: PC 27 Nov 1855

A bill of indictment for libel was found at the assizes held for tho County of Cornwall, in the Island of Jamaica. The prosecution was a private one. The indictment was afterwards removed by certiorari in the Supreme Court of the Island, and tried on the civil side of that Court, when a verdict, of guilty was found. Upon motion for arrest of judgment, the Supreme Court suspended judgment, pending an application to the Queen in Council upon certain grounds raised : Upon a Petition for leave to appeal, their Lordships dismissed the petition, declining to interfere or give any opinion on the merits of the case

Citations:

[1855] UKPC 27

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Commonwealth

Crime

Updated: 24 August 2022; Ref: scu.424612

Hai, Regina v: CACD 6 Oct 2009

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Crim 2157

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

First Appeal – Hai, Regina v CACD 21-Sep-2010
The defendant sought leave to appeal against his conviction for murder. An earlier application had been refused in part. The court now gave its reasons for refusing leave as to the adducing of additional evidence. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 24 August 2022; Ref: scu.424439

Hai, Regina v: CACD 21 Sep 2010

The defendant sought leave to appeal against his conviction for murder. An earlier application had been refused in part. The court now gave its reasons for refusing leave as to the adducing of additional evidence.

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Crim 2020

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

First Appeal – Hai, Regina v CACD 6-Oct-2009
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 24 August 2022; Ref: scu.424115

Ahmed, Regina v: CACD 29 Jul 2010

The defendant had lodged an appeal from his conviction, but then abandoned it. He now sought to have that treated as a nullity.
Held: The application had not shown grounds which might allow the withdrawal of the abandonment, and was refused.

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Crim 1937

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Medway CACD 1976
The court had jurisdiction to give an applicant or appellant leave to withdraw a notice of abandonment of appeal or application for leave to appeal only where the notice of abandonment can be treated as a nullity.
Lawson J said: ‘The answer to . .
Cited – Regina v Offield CACD 2002
The court considered as an additional ground allowing the withdrawal of an abandonment of an appeal: ‘bad advice given by some legal advisor which has resulted in an unintended, ill considered decision to abandon the appeal’. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 24 August 2022; Ref: scu.424111

Luton Borough Council v Altavon Luton Ltd and Others: Admn 31 Jul 2019

The Council appealed by case stated from a finding that its prosecution of the defendant respondents was ut of time.
Held: The allegation in the information laid was of a continuing act.

Judges:

Nicola Davies LJ, Gross J

Citations:

[2019] EWHC 2415 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Management of Houses in Multiple Occupation (England) Regulations 2006, Magistrates’ Court Act 1980 127

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing, Crime, Magistrates

Updated: 23 August 2022; Ref: scu.642685

Procurator Fiscal, Hamilton v HC: HCJ 1 Jul 2014

The sheriff stated a case, asking whether there had been sufficient corroborative evidence of a theft to found a conviction. A carer was accused of theft from a client.
Held: The opinion of a family member that there had been more money in the drawer before the alleged incident was insufficient: ‘Mr X’s evidence that there was money in the drawer, and that some of that money was missing on his return at 11.55 am, required to be corroborated. Corroboration might have taken the form of supporting evidence from his daughter. But no such corroborative evidence was lead. On that basis alone, particularly bearing in mind the authorities – McDonald v Heron 1966 SLT 61 and Stewart v Hamilton 1996 SCCR 494 – there was no corroboration of an essential fact in the circumstances of this case.’

Judges:

Lady Paton

Citations:

[2014] ScotHC HCJAC – 68

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Crime

Updated: 23 August 2022; Ref: scu.533867

Bewley v Regina: CACD 6 Jul 2012

The defendant appealed against his conviction for possession of a firearm. The crown had been able to make it discharge a pellet only by taking elaborate preparatory steps. ‘There being no dispute but that the starting pistol was a lethal-barrelled weapon, the statutory question was whether any shot, bullet or other missile could be discharged from it.’
Held: The appeal succeeded. The starting pistol fell outwith the definition in s.57(1). It was not a lethal-barrelled weapon from which any shot, bullet or other missile could be discharged. It was an imitation firearm within the meaning of s.57(4). As to whether it was a component part of ‘such a lethal or prohinited weapon’: The definition of firearm cannot include a component part of a lethal-barrelled weapon of any description from which any shot, bullet or other missile can not be discharged. Any other construction would ignore the use of the word ‘such’. If the starting pistol does not fall within the definition of firearm within s.57(1), no part of it could do so.’

Judges:

Moses LJ, Underhill J, Inman QC J

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Crim 1457

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Firearms Act 1968 5(a)(aba) 57(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Law CACD 1-Feb-1999
The defendant appealed against a conviction for possession of a prohibited weapon, namely an MAC 10 submachine gun. It was the opinion of an expert at that laboratory that the weapon was capable of burst fire. It had been adapted to prevent this, . .
Cited – Regina v Jobling CACD 1981
The court considered an appeal against a conviction for possession of a prohibited automatic weapon.
Held: It was insufficient to ask whether the weapon was originally designed to fire continuously; the question was whether it remained so. . .
Cited – Regina v Pannell CACD 1982
The defendant had been found in possession of the disassembled parts for three prohibited automatic firearms.
Held: The appeal failed despite the fact that the ability of the carbines to fire automatically required an operation of some . .
Cited – Cafferata v Wilson KBD 1936
The defendant appealed by case stated against a decision that a dummy revolver which was not capable of firing a bullet or other missile was a firearm within the meaning of section12(1) of the 1920 Act or, alternatively, all the parts of the dummy . .
Cited – Regina v Freeman CACD 1970
The Defendant had been charged on indictment with possessing a firearm without holding the appropriate certificate. The item alleged to be a firearm was a .380 starting revolver described as being of solid construction and with constrictions in the . .
Cited – Kelly (John Joseph) v Mackinnon HCJ 11-May-1982
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 23 August 2022; Ref: scu.462290

Pepper, Regina v: CACD 2 Sep 2010

Appeals against conviction or sentence in respect of an offence of conspiracy to evade the prohibition on the importation of goods, namely cocaine.

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Crim 2136

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime, Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 23 August 2022; Ref: scu.425639

C, Regina v: CACD 2008

The defendant appealed against his conviction for sexual assault on a female when she suffered a mental condition which prevented her indicating her refusal of the touching.
Held: The complainant’s irrational fear due to her mental disorder could not be equated with a lack of capacity to choose, and there was no evidence that she was physically unable to communicate any choice that she had made. ‘Irrational fear that prevents the exercise of choice cannot be equated with lack of capacity to choose. We agree with Munby J’s conclusion that a lack of capacity to choose to agree to sexual activity cannot be ‘person specific’ or, we would add, ‘situation specific’.’ However the court disagreed with the judge’s direction that if the complainant were unable to say no because of an irrational fear, this was capable of amounting to an inability to communicate her choice

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Crim 1155, [2009] 1 Cr App R 211

Statutes:

Sexual Offences Act 2003 30(2)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – X City Council v MB and others; re MAB FD 13-Feb-2006
The adult patient was autistic. The doctors said that he lacked capacity, and the authority sought to prevent his return to Pakistan with, they thought, a view to being married. . .
Applied – Local Authority X v MM and Another; re MM (An Adult) FD 21-Aug-2007
The test for capacity to consent to sexual relations must be the same in its essentials as the test in the criminal law; more importantly ‘a woman either has capacity, for example, to consent to ‘normal’ penetrative vaginal intercourse, or she does . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina v C HL 30-Jul-2009
Consent to Sex Requires Capacity
The prosecution appealed against the reversal of the defendant’s conviction for a sexual assault of a woman said to be unable to communicate her refusal to sex because of her mental disorder.
Held: The appeal was allowed, and the conviction . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 22 August 2022; Ref: scu.373761

Regina v Lloyd: CCA 1967

The defendant had killed his wife. There was evidence that from time to time he had suffered recurrent episodes of reactive depression. Two psychiatrists gave evidence that this was a mental abnormality which to some extent impaired his mental responsibility. Neither was prepared to say that the impairment was substantial. The first said that the depression impaired his responsibility ‘to some extent’. The second said that there was some effect; he could not say to what degree, but although it was not as low as minimal it was not substantial. Ashworth J, at trial, directed the jury ‘Fourthly, this word ‘substantial’, members of the jury. I am not going to try to find a parallel for the word ‘substantial’. You are the judges, but your own common sense will tell you what it means. This far I will go. Substantial does not mean total, that is to say, the mental responsibility need not be totally impaired, so to speak destroyed altogether. At the other end of the scale substantial does not mean trivial or minimal. It is something in between and Parliament has left it to you and other juries to say on the evidence, was the mental responsibility impaired, and, if so, was it substantially impaired?’
Held: Edmund Davies J approved the direction.
He rejected an argument that the judge had erred in not directing the jury that ‘substantially’ meant ‘really present’ or ‘not trivial’. That was a submission that it meant no more than that there was some operating impairment, and thus that any such sufficed, so long as it was not trivial: ‘This court is wholly unable to accept that submission. The word ‘substantially’ obviously is inserted in the Act with a view to carrying some meaning. It does carry a meaning. This court is quite unable to see that the direction given to the jury on the meaning of this word, can validly be criticised, and finds itself in a difficulty of saying that any distinction can be validly drawn between the direction given in the instant case and that approved of by this court in Reg v Simcox.’

Judges:

Edmund Davies J

Citations:

[1967] 1 QB 175

Statutes:

Homicide Act 1957

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Khan CACD 27-Jul-2009
On his trial for murder the defendant produced unchallenged expert evidence that at the time of the offence, his mental responsibility for the killing was substantially impaired by his mental illness. He said that in these circumstances the charge . .
Cited – Golds, Regina v SC 30-Nov-2016
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder, saying that he should have been only convicted of manslaughter, applying the new test for diminished responsibility as provided under the 1957 Act as amended, and particularly whether the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 22 August 2022; Ref: scu.368588

Regina v Goodard: CACD 25 Feb 1992

The defendant appealed his conviction after he was found to have offered to supply a controlled drug. At his trial he had claimed that he had not intended to supply the drug.
Held: The appeal failed. The trial judge had correctly directed the jury that it was no defence to show that he had not intended to supply the drug. The offence of offering to supply was complete when the offer was made.

Citations:

[1992] Crim LR 588

Statutes:

Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 4(1)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Applied – Regina v Gill CACD 21-Dec-1992
The defendant and another had vitamin C tablets which were believed to be ecstacy. The defendant was arrested on trying to sell a tablet. He appealed a conviction for conspiracy to offer to supply a controlled drug.
Held: The appeal failed. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 22 August 2022; Ref: scu.263842

Regina v Venna: CACD 31 Jul 1975

An assault is an act by which the defendant intentionally or recklessly causes the complainant to apprehend immediate, or to sustain, unlawful personal violence. The jury ought to be directed that the defendant cannot be guilty of an assault unless the prosecution proves that he acted with the mental element necessary to constitute his action on assault, that is that the defendant intentionally or recklessly applied force to the person of another.

Judges:

James LJ

Citations:

[1975] 3 All ER 788, [1976] 1 QB 421, [1975] EWCA Crim 4

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Scarlett CACD 18-May-1993
The force used by the defendant in self defence was justified even though there was a mistake as to the extent to which force was required. ‘If the mental element necessary to prove an assault is an intention to apply unlawful force to the victim, . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Armstrong-Braun Admn 5-Oct-1998
A building site was subject to a requirement to move great crested newts before work could proceed. The defendant, a local councillor interfered to prevent a digger destroying the land until the newts had been moved. He appealed his conviction for . .
Cited – Regina v Kimber CACD 1983
For mens rea, it is the defendant’s belief, not the grounds on which it is based, which goes to negative the intent. The guilty state of mind was the intent to use personal violence to a woman without her consent. If the defendant did not so intend, . .
Cited – Regina v K HL 25-Jul-2001
In a prosecution for an offence of indecent assault on a girl under 16 under the section, it was necessary for the prosecution to prove the absence of a positive belief in the defendant’s mind that the victim was 16 or over. The legislation history . .
Cited – Regina v Spratt CACD 2-Jan-1990
The defendant fired his air gun from a window hitting a six year old girl. He admitted a section 47 assault on the basis that he had been unaware of her presence, and had given no thought to any risk.
Held: Failure to give any thought to a . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Majewski HL 1976
The defendant took a cocktail of drink and drugs and, whilst intoxicated, assaulted pub landlord. He said that he did not know what he was doing, and had no mens rea, that self-induced intoxication could be a defence to a charge of assault, and that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 22 August 2022; Ref: scu.249934

Crawford v Crown Prosecution Service: Admn 4 Feb 2008

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 148 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See Also – C v Crown Prosecution Service Admn 8-Feb-2008
The court considered the practice of hearing submissions from the media in relation to reporting restrictions.
Held: Thomas LJ rejected the submission that, in conducting the Re S balancing exercise the Court should have regard to the public . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Criminal Practice

Updated: 22 August 2022; Ref: scu.264420

Secretary of State for the Home Department v AN: Admn 29 Feb 2008

The court considered a challenge to a non-derogating control order.
Held: Mitting J said: ‘the conclusion which I draw from the four speeches of the majority in MB is that unless, at a minimum, the Special Advocates are able to challenge the Secretary of State’s grounds for suspicion on the basis of instructions from the controlled person which directly address their essential features, the controlled person will not receive the fair hearing to which he is entitled except, perhaps, in those cases in which he has no conceivable answer to them’.

Judges:

Mitting J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 372 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Secretary of State for the Home Department v AH Admn 9-May-2008
The claimant, an Iraqi national, had been about to be deported when he was re-arrested for Terrorism offences for which he was acquitted. He was then made subject to a non-derogating control order. He now challenged the renewal of that order, even . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Human Rights

Updated: 22 August 2022; Ref: scu.266040

Regina v Egan: CACD 1992

The court considered the appropriate directions to a jury in diminished responsibility defence to murder charge.
Watkins LJ said: ‘In R v Lloyd . . directions as to the word ‘substantial’, to the effect that (1) the jury should approach the word in a broad commonsense way or (2) the word meant ‘more than some trivial degree of impairment which does not make any appreciable difference to a person’s ability to control himself, but it means less than total impairment’ were both approved.’

Judges:

Watkins LJ

Citations:

[1992] 4 All ER 470

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Gittens CACD 1984
Lord Lane set out the directions to be given to a jury on the defence of diminished responsibility: ‘Where a defendant suffers from an abnormality of mind arising from arrested or retarded development or inherent causes or induced by disease or . .

Cited by:

Disapproved – Regina v Dietschmann HL 27-Feb-2003
Voluntary drunkenness No Diminished Responsibility
The defendant had been convicted of murder. At the time of the assault, he was both intoxicated to the point of losing his inhibitions and was also suffering an abnormality of mind sufficient substantially to reduce his mental responsibility.
Cited – Hendy, Regina v CACD 12-Apr-2006
The applicant was sentenced to life imprisonment in 1992 for a brutal murder. He had pleaded diminished responsibility. There were now no papers from the trial. Medical evidence now suggested that at the time of the trial he would have suffered a . .
Cited – Golds, Regina v SC 30-Nov-2016
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder, saying that he should have been only convicted of manslaughter, applying the new test for diminished responsibility as provided under the 1957 Act as amended, and particularly whether the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 21 August 2022; Ref: scu.179636

Regina v Price: CACD 18 Jul 2003

The appellant had been convicted of indecent assault. When inspecting an apartment as a prosective tenant, with the complainant, he had stroked her legs, outside her clothing and below the knee. He appealed saying this was insufficient to constitute an indecent assault.
Held: If the jury believed the complainant’s evidence, and following Court, the acts could constitute an indecent assault.

Citations:

Times 20-Aug-2003

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Court HL 1989
When considering whether an action constituted an indecent assault, the jury was to be asked whether ‘right-minded persons would consider the conduct indecent or not.’
Lord Ackner: ‘It was common ground before your Lordships, and indeed it is . .
Cited – Regina v George CCA 1952
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 21 August 2022; Ref: scu.185749

Regina v Venn: CACD 1 Feb 2003

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 is admissible provided its probative value outweighs its prejudicial effect. While the ‘similar facts’ rule remains a rule of law as to admissibility rather than a matter of discretion its now more broad-ranging and contextual nature offers judges a greater degree of latitude in assessing whether a combination of features, not striking in themselves, amount to a sufficient connection for the purposes of the rule. While the question of the admissibility of ‘similar fact’ evidence in relation to various counts joined in the indictment is always an important one to be considered and will frequently govern the outcome of an application to sever, it is not necessarily decisive. Evidence of distress is still admissible in limited circumstances, if it might reasonably be linked with earlier sexual abuse. In this case the evidence should not have been admitted, but the judges summing up had minimised it to an extent which left the conviction safe.
Discussing attempts to describe the situations in which similar fact evidence may be admissible, the court held: ‘the infinite variety of factual situations which may be involved and the fact that the prosecution may legitimately seek to rely upon ‘similar facts’ in a variety of different ‘issue’ situations. The classic examples are (1) the question of identity, in which respect the Crown Court Bench Book 1 at 20.1 and 20.2 gives two specimen directions, (2) where mistake, accident or innocent association is in issue: see Archbold 2003 at 13-16 to 13-21, (3) where the defence is based on an assertion that two or more complainants are lying or mistaken; see Archbold 13-22 to 13-26(e) and direction 20.3. In all these cases, the nature of the identifiable common feature or features which may constitute a significant connection is bound to depend upon the context and on circumstances which cannot be prescribed.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Potter His Honour Judge Mellor The Honourable Mr Justice Mackay

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Crim 236

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v P HL 1991
The defendant faced specimen counts of rape and incest against each of his two daughters. The trial judge refused an application for separate trials in respect of the offences alleged against each daughter. The defendant was convicted.
Held: . .
Cited – Regina v Williams (John) QBD 7-Oct-1994
A Police Constable’s fleeting view of a Defendant could be sufficient identification, subject to checks in court. However a Turnbull warning as to the need for corroboration may not always be necessary. The ‘striking similarity’ or ‘signature’ test . .
Cited – Regina v Musquera CACD 1999
The court observed that, while the decision in DPP v P had eliminated the necessity to identify a striking similarity, it was still necessary to invoke some identifiable common feature or features constituting a significant connection and going . .
Cited – Regina v Ryder CACD 16-Mar-1993
Where there is any suggestion that similar fact evidence might be affected by collusion, it may be appropriate for the judge to hold a voir dire. The rationale of similar fact evidence is that two or more people do not make up or mistakenly make . .
Cited – Regina v Keast CACD 5-Nov-1997
The defendant appealed several convictions for sexual assault against his step-daughters. He said that evidence of her demeanour had been wrongly admitted.
Held: The distress of a complainant shortly after or at the time of an allegation of . .
Cited – Regina v Redpath CCA 1962
Evidence as to the distress of a complainant may not carry probative weight if it is only part and parcel of the making of a complaint. However, it may properly be afforded weight if the complainant is unaware of being observed, and if the distress . .
Cited – Regina v Chauhan CACD 1981
Evidence of a complainant’s distress is not admissible unless the complainant is unaware of being observed, and if the distress is exhibited at the time of, or shortly after, the offence itself, or in circumstances which appear to implicate the . .

Cited by:

Cited – O’Brien v Chief Constable of the South Wales Police CA 23-Jul-2003
The claimant sought damages for malicious prosecution, and sought to adduce similar fact evidence. The defendant appealed an order admitting the evidence.
Held: Comparisons between admission of similar fact evidence in civil and criminal . .
Cited – Jones and Another, Regina v CACD 30-Sep-2019
The court considered the status of evidence given by a counsellor as to her consultations with the victim, and as to whether it counted as expert or opinion evidence.
Held: A counsellor’s evidence should in general be limited to the facts of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Evidence

Updated: 21 August 2022; Ref: scu.179518

Regina v Kimber: CACD 1983

For mens rea, it is the defendant’s belief, not the grounds on which it is based, which goes to negative the intent. The guilty state of mind was the intent to use personal violence to a woman without her consent. If the defendant did not so intend, he was entitled to be found not guilty. If he did not so intend because he believed she was consenting, the prosecution will have failed to prove the charge, irrespective of the grounds for the defendant’s belief. There had to be evidence that the appellant had intended to do what he did unlawfully. However, ‘recklessness’ is established by ‘indifference’ to the woman’s wishes, ‘aptly described in the colloquial expression, ‘Couldn’t care less”.
Lawton LJ said: ‘The offence of indecent assault is now statutory: see section14 of the Sexual Offences Act 1956. The prosecution had to prove that the appellant made an indecent assault on Betty. As there are no words in the section to indicate that Parliament intended to exclude mens rea as an element in this offence, it follows that the prosecution had to prove that the appellant intended to commit it. This could not be done without first proving that the appellant intended to assault Betty. In this context assault clearly includes battery. An assault is an act by which the defendant intentionally or recklessly causes the complainant to apprehend immediate, or to sustain, unlawful personal violence . . In this case the appellant by his own admissions did intentionally lay his hands on Betty. That would not, however, have been enough to prove the charge. There had to be evidence that the appellant had intended to do what he did unlawfully. When there is a charge of indecent assault on a woman, the unlawfulness can be proved . . by evidence that the defendant intended to cause bodily harm. In most cases, however, the prosecution tries to prove that the complainant did not consent to what was done. The burden of proving lack of consent rests upon the prosecution: see Reg v May [1912] 3 KB 572, 575, per Lord Alverstone CJ. The consequence is that the prosecution has to prove that the defendant intended to lay hands on his victim without her consent. If he did not intend to do this, he is entitled to be found not guilty; and if he did not so intend because he believed she was consenting, the prosecution will have failed to prove the charge. It is the defendant’s belief, not the grounds on which it was based, which goes to negative the intent.’

Judges:

Lawton LJ

Citations:

[1983] 1 WLR 1118, [1983] 3 All ER 316, (1983) 77 Cr App R 225

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Regina v Morgan HL 30-Apr-1975
The defendants appealed against their convictions for rape, denying mens rea and asserting a belief (even if mistaken) that the victim had consented.
Held: For a defence of mistake to succeed, the mistake must have been honestly made and need . .
Dicta doubted – Regina v Phekoo CACD 1981
The defendant was charged with doing acts calculated to interfere with the peace and comfort of residential occupiers so as to cause them to give up their occupation contrary to section 1(3)(a) of the 1977 Act. The defendant contended that he did . .
Cited – Regina v Venna CACD 31-Jul-1975
An assault is an act by which the defendant intentionally or recklessly causes the complainant to apprehend immediate, or to sustain, unlawful personal violence. The jury ought to be directed that the defendant cannot be guilty of an assault unless . .
Cited – Rex v Donovan CCA 1934
The defendant was convicted of indecent assault and common assault after caning a 17 year old female complainant for the purposes of sexual gratification. The complainant suffered actual bodily harm, though the defendant was not charged with an . .

Cited by:

Cited – B (A Minor) v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 23-Feb-2000
Prosecution to prove absence of genuine belief
To convict a defendant under the 1960 Act, the prosecution had the burden of proving the absence of a genuine belief in the defendant’s mind that the victim was 14 or over. The Act itself said nothing about any mental element, so the assumption must . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Armstrong-Braun Admn 5-Oct-1998
A building site was subject to a requirement to move great crested newts before work could proceed. The defendant, a local councillor interfered to prevent a digger destroying the land until the newts had been moved. He appealed his conviction for . .
Cited – Regina v K HL 25-Jul-2001
In a prosecution for an offence of indecent assault on a girl under 16 under the section, it was necessary for the prosecution to prove the absence of a positive belief in the defendant’s mind that the victim was 16 or over. The legislation history . .
Cited – Ashley and Another v Sussex Police CA 27-Jul-2006
The deceased was shot by police officers raiding his flat in 1998. The claimants sought damages for his estate. They had succeeded in claiming damages for false imprisonment, but now appealed dismissal of their claim for damages for assault and . .
Cited – Ashley and Another v Chief Constable of Sussex Police HL 23-Apr-2008
The claimants sought to bring an action for damages after a family member suspected of dealing drugs, was shot by the police. At the time he was naked. The police officer had been acquitted by a criminal court of murder. The chief constable now . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 21 August 2022; Ref: scu.195970

Regina v G and R: CACD 17 Jul 2002

The defendants were children accused of arson being reckless as to the danger of damage. They were not entitled to require the jury to consider as a separate question whether the risk of damage was obvious other than to an ordinary adult.
Held: The question at issue was substantial, as to the mens rea and the evidence required to support the charge, and not procedural. Accordingly the defendants’ human rights to a fair trial were not engaged. The Caldwell case still applied. That case had been criticised, but still stood. The Convention rights should be construed broadly, but even so remained concerned with procedure, not the substantial fairness of the law.

Judges:

Lord Justice Dyson, Mr Justice Silber and Judge Beaumont, QC

Citations:

Times 01-Aug-2002

Statutes:

Criminal Damage Act 1971 1(1) 1(3), European Convention on Human Rights 6

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 – Z And Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 10-May-2001
Four children complained that, for years before they were taken into care by the local authority, its social services department was well aware that they were living in filthy conditions and suffering ‘appalling’ neglect in the home of their . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Human Rights

Updated: 21 August 2022; Ref: scu.174745

Regina v Spratt: CACD 2 Jan 1990

The defendant fired his air gun from a window hitting a six year old girl. He admitted a section 47 assault on the basis that he had been unaware of her presence, and had given no thought to any risk.
Held: Failure to give any thought to a risk was insufficeint to found liabiity. Even in the absence of the term ‘maliciously’, the definition of every offence against the person implied a need to prove mens rea involving either intent or recklessness. The basis of the plea did not amount to an offence.

Citations:

[1990] 1 WLR 1073, [1991] 2 All ER 210

Statutes:

Offences Against the Person Act 1861 47

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Venna CACD 31-Jul-1975
An assault is an act by which the defendant intentionally or recklessly causes the complainant to apprehend immediate, or to sustain, unlawful personal violence. The jury ought to be directed that the defendant cannot be guilty of an assault unless . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v K (a Minor) QBD 1990
The defendant a schoolboy aged 15 had spilled some acid during a chemistry lesson. He went to wash his hands, but took a test tube of acid with him. Hearing others coming and panicking, he poured it into an upturned hot air drier. He returned to . .
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 by:

Overruled – Regina v Savage; Director of Public Prosecutions v Parmenter HL 7-Nov-1991
The first defendant had been convicted of wounding. She had intended to throw beer over her victim, but her glass slipped from her hand, and cut the victim. The second defendant threw his three year old child in the air and caught him, not realising . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 21 August 2022; Ref: scu.182277