Category: Crime

Regina v Nelson Group Services (Maintenance) Ltd: CACD 30 Jul 1998

The fact that a third party was put at risk by the negligence of an employee did not prevent the employer seeking to rely upon the statutory defence that he had taken all reasonable steps to avoid such risks.

Judges:

Roch LJ, Bennett, Thomas JJ

Citations:

Times 17-Sep-1998, [1999] IRLR 646, [1998] EWCA Crim 2511, [1998] 4 All ER 331, [1999] ICR 1004, [1999] 1 WLR 1526

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Health and Safety, Crime

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.87417

Regina v Richardson: CACD 6 Apr 1998

The question was whether a dentist whose right to practice had been suspended was guilty of assault because the apparent consent of a number of patients was vitiated by mistake about her status as a dentist. The dentist had failed to disclose that her right to practice had been suspended. The prosecution argued that the operative mistake was a mistake about the identity of the person performing the act. It was argued that there was no distinction to be drawn between an unqualified person impersonating a dentist and an otherwise qualified dentist whose right to practice had been suspended.
Held: A dentist who was no longer qualified to practice, but who obtained consent of patients to treatment, in ignorance of that loss of qualification, did not thereby commit the offence of assault on the patient even though it was professionally reprehensible.
There was: ‘no basis for the proposition that the rules which determine the circumstances in which consent is vitiated can be different according to whether the case is one of sexual assault or one where the assault is non-sexual. The common element in both these cases is that they involve an assault, and the question is whether consent has been negatived. It is nowhere suggested that the common law draws such a distinction. The common law is not concerned with the question whether the mistaken consent has been induced by fraud on the part of the accused or has been self-induced. It is the nature of the mistake that is relevant, and not the reason why the mistake has been made. In summary, either there is consent to actions on the part of a person in the mistaken belief that he was other than he truly is, in which case it is assault or, short of this, there is no assault.
In essence, the Crown contended that the concept of the ‘identity of the person’ should be extended to cover the qualifications or attributes of the dentist on the basis that the patients consented to treatment by a qualified dentist and not a suspended one. We must reject that submission. In all the charges brought against the defendant the complainants were fully aware of the identity of the defendant. To accede to the submission would be to strain or distort the everyday meaning of the word identity, the dictionary definition of which is ‘the condition of being the same”.

Citations:

Gazette 29-Apr-1998, Times 06-Apr-1998, [1999] QB 444

Statutes:

Offences against the Person Act 1861 47

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Monica, Regina (on The Application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 14-Dec-2018
Deception as to identity did not undermine consent
The claimant had been an environmental campaigner. She had had a sexual relationship with a man who was unknown to her an undercover police officer. She now challenged the decision not to prosecute him for rape.
Held: Her claim failed. Case . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health Professions, Crime

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.88595

Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd (T/A Crockfords): SC 25 Oct 2017

The claimant gambler sought payment of his winnings. The casino said that he had operated a system called edge-sorting to achieve the winnings, and that this was a form of cheating so as to excuse their payment. The system exploited tiny variances in the appearance of the sides of playing cards, and the manipulation of the dealers to help identify cards as they were dealt.
Held: The claimant’s appeal failed. The Court considered what was the meaning of cheating and dishonesty. The game was intended as a game of pure chance. Identifying cards in this way fundamentally undermined the basis of the game. The manipulation of the croupier was dishonest.
The difference in the meaning of dishonesty as between civil and criminal contexts should no longer be maintained. The second limb of the test for dishonesty established on Ghosh, which was that the jury should ask whether the defendant thought himself that his actions were dishonest could no longer be maintained. The law should not excuse those who make a mistake about contemporary standards of honesty, one purpose of the criminal law is to set acceptable standards of behaviour. The tests settled for civil actions was solely an objective one, as to the standards of honesty of the lay objective standards of ordinary and reasonable people. That test should now be applied in both contexts.
‘When dishonesty is in question the fact-finding tribunal must first ascertain (subjectively) the actual state of the individual’s knowledge or belief as to the facts. The reasonableness or otherwise of his belief is a matter of evidence (often in practice determinative) going to whether he held the belief, but it is not an additional requirement that his belief must be reasonable; the question is whether it is genuinely held. When once his actual state of mind as to knowledge or belief as to facts is established, the question whether his conduct was honest or dishonest is to be determined by the fact-finder by applying the (objective) standards of ordinary decent people. There is no requirement that the defendant must appreciate that what he has done is, by those standards, dishonest.’

Judges:

Lord Neuberger, Lady Hale, Lord Kerr, Lord Hughes, Lord Thomas

Citations:

[2017] UKSC 67, UKSC 2016/0213, [2018] AC 391, [2018] 1 Cr App R 12, [2017] WLR(D) 708, [2017] LLR 783, [2018] 2 All ER 406, [2017] Lloyd’s Rep FC 561, [2017] 3 WLR 1212, [2018] Crim LR 395

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary, SC am 13 Jul 17, SC pm 13 Jul 17, SC Summary video

Statutes:

Gambling Act 2005 334 335

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At First Instance – Ivey v Genting Casinos UK Ltd (T/A Crockfords Club) QBD 8-Oct-2014
The claimant, a professional gambler, sued the defendant casino for his winnings. The club replied that the claimant’s methods amounted to a form of cheating, and that no liability arose to pay the winnings.
Held: The claim failed. ‘The fact . .
Cited – Regina v Governor of Brixton Prison, Ex parte Sjoland and Metzler CA 1912
The defendant was found guilty of cheating when winning a three card trick by the use of ‘sleight of hand’ . .
Appeal from – Ivey v Genting Casinos UK Ltd (T/A Crockfords Club) CA 4-Nov-2016
The claimant sought recovery of his substantial winnings from the defendant gaming club. The club had resisted saying that the methods used by the claimant at cards, called, ‘edge sorting’ was a form of cheating, a criminal offence within the . .
Cited – Welham v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 1961
The House considered what was required to establish an ‘intent to defraud’.
Held: Lord Radcliffe said: ‘Now, I think that there are one or two things that can be said with confidence about the meaning of this word ‘ defraud ‘. It requires a . .
Cited – Regina v Williams 1953
The defendant, a sup-post office mistress, appealed against her conviction for larceny by the use of of ‘false pretences’.
Held: When considering the word ‘fraudulently’ from the phrase ‘fraudulently and without claim of right made in good . .
Cited – Regina v Feely CACD 1973
In relation to a charge of theft where the issue of dishonesty is raised, the issue must be left to the jury. Dishonesty is not a matter of law, but a jury question of fact and standards. Except to the limited extent that section 2 of the Theft Act . .
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 . .
Overruled – Regina v Ghosh CACD 5-Apr-1982
The defendant surgeon was said to have made false claims for payment for operations, and was charged under the 1968 Act. He claimed to have been entitled to the sums claimed, and denied that he had been dishonest. The court considered the meaning of . .
Cited – Hayes, Regina v CACD 21-Dec-2015
The defendant appealed from his conviction for conspiracy to defraud in connection with the alleged manipulation of the Yen LIBOR.
Held: The appeal failed: ‘the critical issue for the jury’s consideration in this case was whether they believed . .
Cited – Regina v Gilks CACD 27-Jun-1972
The appellant had placed a bet at a betting shop on a certain horse. A horse with a similar name won, but by mistake the shop paid out on the bet. The appellant knew of the mistake, but refused to return the winnings. He now appealed against his . .
Cited – Church of the New Faith v Commissioner of Pay-Roll Tax (Victoria) 27-Oct-1983
(High Court of Australia) Meaning of religion – scientology church application for tax exemption. The trend is towards a ‘newer, more expansive, reading’ of religion. However ‘Religious conviction is not a solvent of legal obligation.’
High . .
Cited – Barlow Clowes International Ltd and Another v Eurotrust International Ltd and others PC 10-Oct-2005
(Court of Appeal of the Isle of Man) Defendants appealed a finding of dishonest assistance in the activities of Barlow Clowes.
Held: The judge had been able to reach the conclusions on the basis of the evidence. The appeal of the deemster . .
Cited – Starglade Properties Ltd v Nash CA 19-Nov-2010
It is ultimately for the court to decide, as it must in the case of the standard of honesty to be expected in dealing of businessmen and trustees, whether or not conduct amounts to cheating. The standard is objective.
Leveson LJ identified the . .
Cited – Regina v Greenstein; Regina v Green CACD 1975
Meaning of dishonesty under the 1968 Act. . .
Cited – Cornelius, Regina v CACD 14-Mar-2012
The defendant appealed against his conviction for fraud under the 2006 Act, saying that the judge had wrongly failed to give a Ghosh direction. As a solicitor he had organised a scheme for buying properties, obtaining finance by the nomination of . .
Cited – Regina v McIvor CA 1982
The defendant had been refused a loan by his employers. He took the money anyway from the till and repaid it. On discovery he was charged with theft. He denied that he had been dishonest. He had always intended to repay it and had done so. He . .
Cited – Regina v Landy; Regina v White etc CACD 1982
The defendants appealed against convictions for conspiracy to defraud. The three were bank employees including the chairman, and between them managed to take money from the bank by different forms of malpractice. The defendants denied dishonesty, . .
Approved – Royal Brunei Airlines SDN BHD v Tan PC 24-May-1995
(Brunei) The defendants were a one-man company, BLT, and the one man, Mr Tan. A dishonest third party to a breach of trust was liable to make good a resulting loss even though he had received no trust property. The test of knowledge was an objective . .
Cited – Twinsectra Ltd v Yardley and Others HL 21-Mar-2002
Solicitors acted in a loan, giving an undertaking as to its application. In breach of that undertaking they released it to the borrower. The appellants appealed a finding of liability as contributors to the breach.
Held: ‘Money in a . .
Cited – Rostron and Another, Regina v CACD 16-Jul-2003
The defendants appealed from their conviction for theft having gone at night to a golf course to recover golf balls from a water hazard on the course. They said that the golf balls had been abandoned by their owners . .
Cited – Abou Rahmah and others v Abacha and others CA 8-Nov-2006
The appellants were victims of a fraud conducted via the respondent bank by one of their clients. They appealed from a decision that the bank was not liable to the victims either in the equitable tort of knowing or dishonest assistance in a breach . .

Cited by:

Cited – ZC v Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust QBD 26-Jul-2019
Defamation/privacy claims against doctors failed
The claimant, seeking damages for alleged defamation, now asked for the case to be anonymised.
Held: The conditions for anonymisation were not met. The anonymity would be retained temporarily until any time for appeal had passed.
As to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Contract

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.597668

Rex v Forde: CCA 1923

A man, under the age of 23, had intercourse with a 15 year-old girl. He was charged with offences against section 5(1) of the 1885 Act and section 52 of the 1861 Act, relating to the same act of intercourse. He pleaded not guilty to the first (more serious) offence but guilty to the second and was bound over. It was found as a fact that he had had reasonable cause to believe that the girl was over 16 and the charge under section 5 was not proceeded with.
Held: On appeal, it was argued that, to avoid absurdity, the statutory defence should be available in relation to the indecent assault charge as well as the carnal knowledge charge, where the indecent assault was the act of carnal knowledge. Counsel for the crown did not contend that the result of the statute was not absurd but said the law was clear. The Court of Criminal Appeal upheld the conviction. Avory J ‘The words of a statute cannot be construed, contrary to their meaning, as embracing cases merely because no good reason appears why those cases should be excluded. It is not the duty of the Court to make the law reasonable, but to expound it as it stands, according to the real sense of the words. Applying that principle, we can find no justification for reading the proviso to s.2 of the Act, which in terms is limited to charges of offences under that section, as applicable to a charge of indecent assault, which is separately dealt with in s.1. It is only by a benevolent construction that any effect can be given to this proviso, seeing that no offence is created by s.2, but if it be assumed to apply to charges under ss.5 or 6 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1885, which are referred to in the earlier part of the section, there is no canon of construction which would justify the Court in applying it to s.1, bearing in mind the various forms of indecent assault which do not amount to carnal knowledge.’ It was no defence on charges of sexual assault that the defendant believed the girl or boy to be under 16 and to be consenting.

Judges:

Avory J

Citations:

(1923) 17 Cr App R 99, [1923] 2 KB 400

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Binding – Rex v Maughan CCA 1934
The defendant was aged 22 and the child between 13 and 16. There were six counts, three of carnal knowledge, three of indecent assault, arising from the same facts. He was acquitted on the carnal knowledge counts, plainly because he made good the . .
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 – 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 – White v Regina CACD 15-Apr-2014
The defendant sought an extension of time for leave to appeal against his conviction for fraud. After his conviction there had been academic debate as to its basis, and the present application was not opposed. He had originally been charged under . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.195982

Governor of Pentonville Prison ex parte Khubchandani: QBD 1980

The court considered whether certain conduct, part of which took place in Ghana, would, mutatis mutandis , have constituted an offence over which the English court had jurisdiction.
Held: ‘Where a deception is made in this country, but the property is obtained outside the jurisdiction, there is no offence under the English law either under the Larceny Act 1916 or section 15 of the Theft Act 1968. The authority for this proposition is to be found in Harden 46 Cr App R 90, a decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal in which the Court was presided over by Lord Parker CJ and which has been followed and applied in Tirado 59 Cr App R 80. Although both Lord Reid and Lord Diplock have on occasion and by way of obiter dicta expressed reservations about the correctness of that decision, ranged against them are the opinions of Viscount Dilhorne, Lord Parker CJ and Lord Widgery CJ. In any event if this Court were minded to query the decision, it cannot do so and it is binding upon this Court.’

Citations:

(1980) 71 Cr App R 241

Statutes:

Fugitive Offenders Act 1967

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Followed – Regina v Harden 1962
The appellant, in England, sent false hire purchase agreements to a company in Jersey, who posted back cheques to him. The court analysed the transaction in contractual terms, and held that as the post office was the appellant’s agent to carry the . .
Cited – Regina v Tirado 1974
. .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Manning CACD 24-Jun-1998
The defendant appealed his conviction for obtaining property by deception where part of the offence had taken place abroad.
Held: Smith should be overturned. The last act or terminatory theory remains the binding common law of England and . .
Applied – Regina v Thompson 1984
The appellant, in Kuwait, had fraudulently caused a bank there to credit his bank balances in England.
Held: The court discussed its jurisdiction: ‘It is of course a basic principle of our criminal law that no British subject can be tried . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.196563

Regina v Bentham: CACD 5 Dec 2003

In the course of a robbery the defendant had held his finger in his pocket to suggest that he was pointing a gun at the victim. He now appealed against a conviction for possession of an imitation firearm.
Held: The defendant could not successfully argue that he could not be prosecuted for possessing a part of his own anatomy, it was common to use expressions which implied just that. The intention of the section was to reflect the situation as perceived by the victim. The section would be construed purposively. That required an interpretation which would leave the defendant properly convicted.

Judges:

Kennedy LJ, Curtis, Forbes JJ

Citations:

Times 10-Dec-2003, Gazette 22-Jan-2004

Statutes:

Firearms Act 1968 17(2) 57

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Sloan 1974
(Canada) A man cannot be ‘armed with his own finger’. . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Bentham, Regina v HL 10-Mar-2005
In the course of a theft, the defendant had held his fingers in his pocket so as to suggest that he had a gun. He appealed conviction for possessing an imitation firearm.
Held: ‘Rules of statutory construction have a valuable role when the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.188702

Director of Public Prosecutions v Rogers: 1953

It was not an assault on a girl, for a man to invite an eleven year old girl to touch him (in this case her father) indecently.

Citations:

[1953] 1 WLR 1017, [1953] 2 All ER 644

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

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 – Regina v J HL 14-Oct-2004
The defendant was to have been accused of having unlawful sexual intercourse with a girl under 16. Proceedings could not be brought, because the allegation was more than a year old, and he was instead accused of indecent assault, but on the same . .
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.195967

Regina v Cunningham Graham and Burns: 1888

The court rejected a suggestion that there was a right of public meeting in Trafalgar Square or any other thoroughfare. ‘So far as I know the law of England, the use of public thoroughfares is for people to pass and repass along them. That is the purpose for which they are, as we say, dedicated by the owner of them for the use of the public, and they are not dedicated to the public use for any other purpose that I know of other than for the purpose of passing and repassing; and, if you come to regard Trafalgar Square as a place of public resort simply, it seems to me it would be very analogous to the case of public thoroughfares.’

Judges:

Charles J

Citations:

(1888) 16 Cox 420

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Jones and Lloyd HL 4-Mar-1999
21 people protested peacefully on the verge of the A344, next to the perimeter fence at Stonehenge. Some carried banners saying ‘Never Again,’ ‘Stonehenge Campaign 10 years of Criminal Injustice’ and ‘Free Stonehenge.’ The officer in charge . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Land

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.192194

Regina v Ellis: 1899

In the case of what is a result crime in English Law, the offence is committed in England and justiciable by an English court if any part of the proscribed result takes place in England. The gist of the offence of obtaining by false pretences lies in the act of obtaining, and that if this act is done within the jurisdiction it matters not that the false pretence was made abroad.

Citations:

[1899] 1 QB 230

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Secretary of State for Trade v Markus HL 1976
The offence alleged inducing persons to ‘take part’ in arrangements relating to property under the section. The participation had taken place partly in this country and partly abroad.
Held: If the ‘last constituent element’ is a continuing or . .
Cited – Regina v Harden 1962
The appellant, in England, sent false hire purchase agreements to a company in Jersey, who posted back cheques to him. The court analysed the transaction in contractual terms, and held that as the post office was the appellant’s agent to carry the . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Stonehouse HL 1977
The defendant had been charged with attempting to obtain property by deception by fabricating his death by drowning in the sea off Miami in Florida. The final act alleged to constitute the offence occurred outside the jurisdiction of the English . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.196557

Her Majestys Attorney General for Jersey v Holley: PC 15 Jun 2005

(Jersey) The defendant appealed his conviction for murder, claiming a misdirection on the law of provocation. A chronic alcoholic, he had admitted killing his girlfriend with an axe. Nine law lords convened to seek to reconcile conflicting decisions of the House as to provocation.
Held: The defence of provocation has two ingredients. The first, subjective or factual, ingredient, is that the defendant was provoked into losing his self-control. In deciding whether this ingredient exists in a particular case all evidence which is probative is admissible, including evidence of any mental or other abnormality making it more or less likely that the defendant lost his self-control. The second ingredient, the objective or evaluative ingredient, raises, in the language of the statute, ‘the question whether the provocation was enough to make a reasonable man do as he did . . [taking] into account everything both done and said according to the effect . . it would have on a reasonable man’. This ingredient has two elements. The first element calls for an assessment of the gravity of the provocation. The second element calls for application of an external standard of self-control: ‘whether the provocation was enough to make a reasonable man do as he did’.
Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead (Majority): Whilst the approach taken in Smith (Morgan) might be attractive, it was not accurate: ‘ The law of homicide is a highly sensitive and highly controversial area of the criminal law. In 1957 Parliament altered the common law relating to provocation and declared what the law on this subject should thenceforth be. In these circumstances it is not open to judges now to change (‘develop’) the common law and thereby depart from the law as declared by Parliament. ‘ and ‘Under the statute the sufficiency of the provocation (‘whether the provocation was enough to make a reasonable man do as [the defendant] did’) is to be judged by one standard, not a standard which varies from defendant to defendant. Whether the provocative act or words and the defendant’s response met the ‘ordinary person’ standard prescribed by the statute is the question the jury must consider, not the altogether looser question of whether, having regard to all the circumstances, the jury consider the loss of self-control was sufficiently excusable. The statute does not leave each jury free to set whatever standard they consider appropriate in the circumstances by which to judge whether the defendant’s conduct is ‘excusable’. ‘ and ‘In expressing their conclusion above their Lordships are not to be taken as accepting that the present state of the law is satisfactory. It is not. The widely held view is that the law relating to provocation is flawed to an extent beyond reform by the courts . . . Their Lordships share this view.’

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Scott of Foscote, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, Baroness Hale of Richmond, Lord Carswell

Citations:

[2005] UKPC 23, Times 21-Jun-2005, [2005] 3 WLR 29

Links:

Bailii, PC, PC

Statutes:

Homicide Act 1957 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina (Director of Public Prosecutions) v Camplin HL 1978
The court considered the direction to be given as to the existence of provocation so as to reduce a charge of murder to one of manslaughter. The reasonable man in the definition should be one with the defendant’s mental condition. ‘The judge should . .
Cited – Regina v Morhall HL 21-Jul-1995
The defendant was a glue sniffer. He had been taunted, and eventually attacked one of those villifying him. The judge excluded from the jury that the characteristics he suffered as a glue sniffer which might affect his response to provocation.
Cited – Rex v Kirkham 1837
In order to reduce Killing of a person to the crime of manslaughter, there must not only be sufficient provocation, but the jury must be satisfied that the fatal blow was given in consequence of that provocation. If A. had formed a deliberate design . .
Wrongly Decided – Regina v Smith (Morgan James) HL 27-Jul-2000
The defendant had sought to rely upon the defence of provocation. He had suffered serious clinical depression.
Held: When directing a jury on the law of provocation, it was no longer appropriate to direct the jury to disregard any particular . .
Cited – Regina v Welsh 1869
The judge directed the jury as to provocation saying that in order to reduce the crime to manslaughter, there should have been serious provocation, ‘something which might naturally cause an ordinary and reasonably minded man to lose his self-control . .
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 – Mancini v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 1941
There are exceptional cases to the rule in Woolmington for: ‘offences where onus of proof is specially dealt with by statute’. ‘There is no reason to repeat to the jury the warning as to reasonable doubt again and again, provided that the direction . .
Cited – Regina v Duffy CCA 1949
The court approved Devlin J’s direction to the jury on the defence of provocation to a charge of murder which had described provocation: ‘Provocation is some act or series of acts done or words spoken by the dead man to the accused which would cause . .
Cited – Regina v Raven CACD 1982
The 22-year old defendant had a mental age of 9 years. He said it was inappropriate when judging the availability of the defence of provocation to a charge of murder to ignore that fact. The Recorder of London ruled that, having regard to the test . .
Cited – Regina v Ahluwalia CACD 31-Jul-1992
The appellant sought substitution of a conviction for manslaughter of her husband for that of his murder. She had long suffered violent treatment by him. She had not raised the issue of diminished responsibility at trial.
Held: The court . .

Cited by:

Cited – Van Dongen and Another, Regina v CACD 5-Jul-2005
The defendant brothers appealed convictions for murder. They had pleaded self defence. The injuries on the deceased suggested a substantial number of wounds were inflicted when he was in a curled up defensive post.
Held: The provocation . .
Cited – James, Regina v; Regina v Karimi CACD 25-Jan-2006
The defendants appealed their convictions for murder, saying that the court had not properly guided the jury on provocation. The court was faced with apparently conflicting decision of the House of Lords (Smith) and the Privy Council (Holley).
Preferred – Mohammed, Regina v CACD 13-Jul-2005
The court granted permission to appeal against a conviction for murder on grounds that related to the judge’s summing up in respect of provocation: ‘Although Holley is a decision of the Privy Council and Morgan Smith a decision of the House of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Leading Case

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.226982

White v Procurator Fiscal, Perth: HCJ 27 Jan 1999

The defendant challenged his conviction for supplying false information on applying for a shotgun certificate. He had said that he had no convictions, but failed to disclose an adminishment, refusing to add the case to the application, having explained to the constable that he had not been convicted.
Held: ‘There may have been an error in law in not appreciating that a conviction such as this was a conviction but we are satisfied that this was a false statement made by the appellant and that there was corroboration.’

Judges:

Lord Prosser

Links:

ScotC

Statutes:

Firearms Act 1968 26(5)

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Crime

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.170986

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

Appeals were brought complaining as to the apparent reversal of the burden of proof in road traffic cases and in cases under the Terrorism Acts. Was a legal or an evidential burden placed on a defendant?
Held: Lord Bingham of Cornhill said: ‘The overriding concern is that a trial should be fair, and the presumption of innocence is a fundamental right directed to that end. The Convention does not outlaw presumptions of fact or law but requires that these should be kept within reasonable limits and should not be arbitrary. It is open to states to define the constituent elements of a criminal offence, excluding the requirement of mens rea. But the substance and effect of any presumption adverse to a defendant must be examined, and must be reasonable.’
The justifiability and fairness of such defences have to be judged in the particular context of each case. The defendant being found drunk in charge a car, he appealed a finding which relied upon his failure to prove his own intention not to drive. The burden of proof provision in section 5(2) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 imposes a legal burden on an accused who is charged with an offence contrary to section 5(1)(b) of that Act. The second defendant faced charges under the Terrorism Act 2000, of being a member of a proscribed organisation. The A G appealed his acquittal in the Court of Appeal. ‘Section 11(1), considered on its own, is a provision of extraordinary breadth. It would cover a person who joined an organisation when it was not a terrorist organisation or when, if it was, he did not know that it was. It would cover a person who joined an organisation when it was not proscribed or, if it was, he did not know that it was. It would cover a person who joined such an organisation as an immature juvenile. It would cover someone who joined such an organisation abroad in a country where it was not prosribed and came to this country ignorant that it was proscribed here’ Section 11(2) should be read down to impose only an evidential burden on a defendant.

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Steyn, Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Carswell

Citations:

[2004] UKHL 43, Times 14-Oct-2004, [2005] 1 AC 264, [2005] 1 All ER 237, [2004] 3 WLR 976, [2005] RTR 13, (2004) 168 JP 669, (2004) 17 BHRC 339, [2004] All ER (D) 169

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Road Traffic Act 1988 5(2), Terrorism Act 2000 11(2), European Convention on Human Rights 6.2, Human Rights Act 1998

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Daniel MNaghtens Case HL 1843
Daniel M’Naghten suffered from a mental disorder under which he believed that he was being persecuted by various bodies in authority, including the Tory Party. He sought to kill the Tory Prime Minister Sir Robert Peel, but shot and killed instead . .
Cited – Woolmington v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 23-May-1935
Golden Thread of British Justice – Proof of Intent
The appellant had been convicted of the murder of his wife. She had left him and returned to live with her mother. He went to the house. He said he intended to frighten her that he would kill himself if she did not return. He wired a shotgun to . .
Cited – Regina v Hunt (Richard) HL 1987
The court objected to the insistence on leaving the burden throughout a prosecution on the defendant on the ground that ‘the discharge of an evidential burden proves nothing – it merely raises an issue’. The House emphasised the special nature of . .
Cited – Mancini v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 1941
There are exceptional cases to the rule in Woolmington for: ‘offences where onus of proof is specially dealt with by statute’. ‘There is no reason to repeat to the jury the warning as to reasonable doubt again and again, provided that the direction . .
Cited – Regina v Edwards 1975
On a charge of selling intoxicating liquor without a justices’ licence, it is not for the prosecutor to prove that the defendant had no licence but for the defendant to prove that he had. The burden of establishing a statutory exemption by way of a . .
Cited – Jayasena v The Queen PC 1-Dec-2006
J appealed from his conviction of murder. He admitted the act but said that it was in self defence. He said that the Judge had misdirected the jury as to the burden of evidence on the issue of self defence.
Held: Lord Devlin said: ‘Their . .
Cited – Nimmo v Alexander Cowan and Sons Ltd HL 1967
The employer was prosecuted under the 1961 Act.
Held: the burden of proving that it was not reasonably practicable to make and keep a place of work safe rested upon the defendant employer. If an exception was to be established, it was for the . .
Cited – Warner v Metropolitan Police Commissioner HL 1968
The appellant had been convicted of an offence contrary to section 1 of the 1964 Act, of having been found in possession of drugs.
Held: (Reid dissenting) The prosecution had only to prove that the accused knew of the existence of the thing . .
Cited – Sweet v Parsley HL 23-Jan-1969
Mens Rea essential element of statutory Offence
The appellant had been convicted under the Act 1965 of having been concerned in the management of premises used for smoking cannabis. This was a farmhouse which she visited infrequently. The prosecutor had conceded that she was unaware that the . .
Cited – X v United Kingdom ECHR 1972
The defendant had been convicted of knowingly living on the earnings of prostitution contrary to section 30(1) of the Sexual Offences Act 1956.
Held: The Commission rejected as manifestly ill-founded the applicant’s challenge to this provision . .
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 – 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 – Bernard v France ECHR 23-Apr-1998
The presumption of innocence is one of the elements of the fair criminal trial required by article 6(1). Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); No violation of Art. 6-1; No violation of Art. 6-2 . .
Cited – Salabiaku v France ECHR 7-Oct-1988
A Zairese national living in Paris, went to the airport to collect, as he said, a parcel of foodstuffs sent from Africa. He could not find this, but was shown a locked trunk, which he was advised to leave alone. He however took possession of it, . .
Cited – Pham Hoang v France ECHR 25-Sep-1992
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); No violation of Art. 6-1; No violation of Art. 6-2; Violation of Art. 6-3-c; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; . .
Cited – Attorney General v Malta 10-Dec-1991
The applcant challenged a provision which imposed criminal liability on a director of a body which had committed a criminal offence ‘unless he proves that the offence was committed without his knowledge and that he exercised all due diligence to . .
Cited – H v United Kingdom ECHR 1985
The applicant was sentenced to life imprisonment in 1973 for committing a murder in the course of a robbery.
Held: The penalty for this offence at the time it was committed was life imprisonment and thus no issue under Art. 7 (art. 7) arises . .
Cited – Barbera, Messegua, and Jabardo v Spain ECHR 6-Dec-1988
ECHR The presumption of innocence would be violated if, without the accused having previously been proved guilty according to law, a judicial decision concerning him reflected an opinion that he was guilty. The . .
Cited – Brown v United Kingdom ECHR 2-Jul-2002
Article 6(2) of the Convention was not violated by a provision which enabled a newspaper proprietor or publisher to escape strict liability under section 4(5) of the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1976 only if he proved, on the balance of . .
Cited – Bates v United Kingdom ECHR 16-Jan-1996
The claimant sought to challenge the rebuttable presumption as to the breed of a dog enacted in section 5(5) of the Act.
Held: The applicant had been entitled but, although represented, had failed, to call evidence to prove at trial that his . .
Cited – Telfner v Austria ECHR 20-Mar-2001
ECHR The victim of a motor accident was able to identify the offending car, or even whether the driver was male or female. The car was owned by the applicant’s mother, and he denied driving at the time. There was . .
Cited – Heaney and McGuinness v Ireland ECHR 21-Dec-2000
Hudoc The claimants challenged anti-terrorist legislation introduced by the respondent. They complained that it violated the article 6(1) right of the applicants to remain silent and not incriminate themselves, . .
Cited – Porras v Netherlands ECHR 18-Jan-2000
The applicant was convicted of intentionally importing cocaine and he complained that the burden of proof had been reversed by imposing on him an obligation, which he found impossible to discharge, to prove that he was not and could not have been . .
Cited – Regina v Director of Public Prosecutions, ex parte Kebilene and others HL 28-Oct-1999
(Orse Kebeline) The DPP’s appeal succeeded. A decision by the DPP to authorise a prosecution could not be judicially reviewed unless dishonesty, bad faith, or some other exceptional circumstance could be shown. A suggestion that the offence for . .
Cited – Regina v Lambert; Regina v Ali; Regina v Jordan CACD 14-Sep-2000
Each defendant was charged under a statute which provided a defence if they could prove a certain element. They complained that this was a breach of their human rights. The complaint was rejected. It would be wrong to impose a burden of proof on a . .
Cited – Regina v Lambert HL 5-Jul-2001
Restraint on Interference with Burden of Proof
The defendant had been convicted for possessing drugs found on him in a bag when he was arrested. He denied knowing of them. He was convicted having failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that he had not known of the drugs. The case was . .
Cited – Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza HL 21-Jun-2004
Same Sex Partner Entitled to tenancy Succession
The protected tenant had died. His same-sex partner sought a statutory inheritance of the tenancy.
Held: His appeal succeeded. The Fitzpatrick case referred to the position before the 1998 Act: ‘Discriminatory law undermines the rule of law . .
Cited – Janosevic v Sweden ECHR 23-Jul-2002
Complaint was made that tax surcharges were applied in a way which was incompatible with article 6(2) because ‘an almost insurmountable burden of proof’ was imposed on the taxpayer.
Held: There was no need for the Swedish authorities to prove . .
Cited – Selvanayagam v United Kingdom ECHR 12-Dec-2002
Any presumption of law which had operated against the applicant had been within reasonable limits, had taken account of the importance of what was at stake and had maintained the rights of the defence. . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex parte Anderson HL 25-Nov-2002
The appellant had been convicted of double murder. The judge imposed a mandatory life sentence with a minimum recommended term. The Home Secretary had later increased the minimum term under the 1997 Act. The appellant challenged that increase.
Cited – Bellinger v Bellinger HL 10-Apr-2003
Transgender Male to Female not to marry as Female
The parties had gone through a form of marriage, but Mrs B had previously undergone gender re-assignment surgery. Section 11(c) of the 1973 Act required a marriage to be between a male and a female. It was argued that the section was incompatible . .
Cited – Regina v Edwards, Denton and Jackson Hendley Crowley; Attorney General’s Reference (No. 1 of 2004) CACD 29-Apr-2004
The court considered references by the Attorney-General with regard to offences imposing a burden of proof upon the defendant. ‘An evidential burden will be discharged by a defendant by ensuring that there is some evidence before the court which . .
Cited – Regina v Johnstone HL 22-May-2003
The defendant was convicted under the 1994 Act of producing counterfeit CDs. He argued that the affixing of the name of the artist to the CD was not a trade mark use, and that the prosecution had first to establish a civil offence before his act . .
Cited – Regina v Gleeson CACD 3-Oct-2001
The Court of Appeal should not tinker with sentences passed by lower courts in the absence of exceptional circumstances, or where they were wrong in principle, or were manifestly excessive. Here a sentence of 30 months for a professional and . .
Wrongly Decided – Regina v Clive Louden Carass CACD 19-Dec-2001
When a defendant was accused of an offence under the section, and wished to raise a defence under sub-section 4, the duty of proof placed on him by the sub-section amounted to a duty to bring sufficient evidence to raise the defence, and the section . .
Appeal from – Sheldrake v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 24-Feb-2003
The defendant challenged the application of the section, under which he was deemed to have intended to drive a vehicle whilst under the influence of alcohol, unless he could prove it was not his intent to drive, saying this infringed his right to a . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Watkins QBD 1989
The offence in section 5 does not require proof that a defendant is likely to drive when accused of being in charge of a motor vehicle whilst unfit through drink or drugs: ‘In regard to that section two broad propositions are clear. First, the . .
Appeal from – Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002 CACD 21-Mar-2003
The defendant had been tried for an offence under the Act of being a member of a proscribed organisation, and professing membership of Hamas. At trial the Crown accepted an evidential burden, that the offence had to be read down to comply with the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Barker Admn 19-Oct-2004
Driving whilst disqualified – ban expired but no test taken – burden of evidence . .
Cited – Regina v Fraydon Navabi; Senait Tekie Embaye CACD 11-Nov-2005
The defendants had been convicted of not having an immigration document when presenting themselves for interview. They had handed their passports to the ‘agents’ who had assisted their entry.
Held: The jury should have been directed as to the . .
Cited – Regina v Makuwa CACD 23-Feb-2006
The defendant appealed her conviction for using a false instrument (a passport) intending someone else to accept it as genuine.
Held: Once she had brought forward sufficient evidence to support a claim to asylum status, it was then for the . .
Cited – Regina v G CACD 12-Apr-2006
The defendant pleaded guilty to the rape of a twelve year old girl on the agreed basis that he had believed her to be 15, but had been advised that given her age, his belief was immaterial. He now appealed saying that the presumption infringed his . .
Cited – Chargot Limited (T/A Contract Services) and Others, Regina v HL 10-Dec-2008
The victim died on a farm when his dumper truck overturned burying him in its load.
Held: The prosecutor needed to establish a prima facie case that the results required by the Act had not been achieved. He need only establish that a risk of . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Wright; Regina (Scott) v Taunton Deane Magistrates Court Admn 4-Feb-2009
The court heard appeals from rulings under the 2004 Act.
Held: In section 1, the hunting of a wild mammal did not include the search for an animal with a view to flushing it from cover. As to the exemptions, the operation of the 1980 Act and . .
Cited – Watkins v Woolas QBD 5-Nov-2010
The petitioner said that in the course of the election campaign, the respondent Labour candidate had used illegal practices in the form of deliberately misleading and racially inflammatory material.
Held: The claim succeeded, and the election . .
Cited – Webster v Regina CACD 1-Dec-2010
The defendant appealed against his conviction under the 1889 Act for making a corrupt gift to a local government officer. He said that the 1916 Act placed an unfair burden on him to prove that the gift was not corruptly given.
Held: The appeal . .
Cited – Tovey and Others v Ministry of Justice QBD 18-Feb-2011
The claimants, serving prisoners, sought damages saying that the refusal to allow them to vote was in infringement of their human rights. The large numbers of claims had been consolidated in London. The claimant sought to withdraw his claim.
Cited – Tovey and Others v Ministry of Justice QBD 18-Feb-2011
The claimants, serving prisoners, sought damages saying that the refusal to allow them to vote was in infringement of their human rights. The large numbers of claims had been consolidated in London. The claimant sought to withdraw his claim.
Cited – GC v The Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis SC 18-May-2011
The court was asked to decide from whom DNA samples could lawfully be taken by the Police,and for how long they should be kept. The first respondent now said that a declaration of incompatibility of section 64(1A) could not be avoided.
Held: . .
Cited – Waya, Regina v SC 14-Nov-2012
The defendant appealed against confiscation orders made under the 2002 Act. He had bought a flat with a substantial deposit from his own resources, and the balance from a lender. That lender was repaid after he took a replacement loan. He was later . .
Cited – Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission v Gibbons; Same v Karoonian CA 30-Oct-2012
Non-resident parents in each case appealed against suspended orders of imprisonment for non-payment of child support. They argued that the procedures used were indistinguishable from those held to be human rights non-compliant in Mubarak.
Cited – Wood v Revenue and Customs UTTC 25-Jul-2016
UTTC INCOME TAX – discovery assessments made against taxpayer relying on extended time limits on grounds of deliberate conduct – death of taxpayer – whether assessments should be discharged on grounds personal . .
Cited – Shepherd v The Information Commissioner CACD 18-Jan-2019
The defendant had been part of an organisation subject to an investigation of child sex abuse. He was cleared of involvement, but had disseminated the confidential reports containing sensitive personal data to support his contention that the process . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Crime, Human Rights

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.216465

Regina v Derek William Bentley (Deceased): CACD 30 Jul 1998

The defendant had been convicted of murder in 1952, and hung. A court hearing an appeal after many years must apply laws from different eras to different aspects. The law of the offence (of murder) to be applied was that at the time of the offence. In this case however the summing up was so prejudicial as to make the conviction unsafe.
Lord Bingham CJ said that legislation enacted after the conviction and sentence does not affect the correctness of anything done under the law as it stood and was properly applied at the time of trial

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill Lord Justice Kennedy and Mr Justice Collins

Citations:

Times 31-Jul-1998, [1998] EWCA Crim 2516, (2001) 1 Cr App R 307

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Rex v Appleby 1940
Appleby and Osler, while committing an offence of warehouse-breaking, were surprised by police officers. They attempted to escape, but were pursued by the officers and a shot was fired by Osler which killed one of the officers. The expression ‘Let . .
Cited – Connelly v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 1964
Plea of Autrefois Acquit is Narrow in Scope
The defendant had been tried for and acquitted of murder. The prosecution then sought to have him tried for robbery out of the same alleged facts. The House considered his plea of autrefois convict.
Held: The majority identified a narrow . .
Cited – Woolmington v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 23-May-1935
Golden Thread of British Justice – Proof of Intent
The appellant had been convicted of the murder of his wife. She had left him and returned to live with her mother. He went to the house. He said he intended to frighten her that he would kill himself if she did not return. He wired a shotgun to . .
Cited – Mancini v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 1941
There are exceptional cases to the rule in Woolmington for: ‘offences where onus of proof is specially dealt with by statute’. ‘There is no reason to repeat to the jury the warning as to reasonable doubt again and again, provided that the direction . .
Cited – Rex v Kritz 1949
The House discussed the extent of the direction required to be given to a jury as to the standard of proof required: ‘The only other point which has been seriously argued is that because the learned Common Sergeant told the jury that they must be . .
Cited – Lee Chun-Chuen v The Queen PC 1963
Their Lordships explained the meaning of the words of Viscount Salmon in Holmes: ‘It is plain that Viscount Simon must have meant the word ‘actual’ to have a limiting effect and that he had in mind some particular category of intention. He cannot . .
Cited – Rex v Summers HL 1952
The House considered the direction on the standard of proof. Lord Goddard said: ‘It is far better, instead of using the words ‘reasonable doubt’ and then trying to explain what is a reasonable doubt, to direct a jury: ‘You must not convict unless . .
Cited – Regina v Murtagh and Kennedy 1955
. .
Cited – Regina v Hepworth and Fearnley 1955
Lord Goddard discussed again the direction to the jury as to the standard of proof: ‘I think it is very unfortunate to talk to juries about reasonable doubt, because the explanations given of what is and what is not a reasonable doubt are so very . .
Cited – Regina v Bradbury 1969
A court must give a clear direction to a jury on the standard of proof. A mere reference to being ‘satisfied’ without a reference to being sure, or being satisfied beyond reasonable doubt, was inadequate. . .
Cited – Regina v Dunbar 1958
A conviction in a capital case may not stand in the absence of a proper direction on the standard of proof. . .
Cited – Regina v Gourley 1981
The court emphasised the need for a clear direction to a jury on the standard of proof. . .
Cited – Regina v Edwards 1983
The trial judge had omitted to give a rape jury any direction on the standard of proof.
Held: The court regarded that as a serious defect, not cured by references in the speeches of counsel, but applied the proviso to the section so as to . .
Cited – Regina v Quinn 1983
The court laid down the need for a clear direction to a jury on the standard of proof required. . .
Cited – Rex v Cohen and Bateman 1909
The court considered the balance of judicial summings up to juries and the permissible limits of judicial comment: ‘The learned judge is said to have interfered improperly in the conduct of the case, and not to have put it fairly to the jury, and . .
Cited – Regina v West 1910
A judge should not put himself in the position of the jury as regards the decision of facts and that the proviso to the section would not apply where the judge decided facts instead of the jury. . .
Cited – Rex v O’Donnell 1917
The appeal court considered the position of a defendant where the judge had summed up strongly against him: ‘ . . a judge, when directing a jury, is clearly entitled to express his opinion on the facts of the case, provided that he leaves the issues . .
Cited – Rex v Frampton 1917
In this case it was held that the trial judge had gone too far in his comments and could not really be said to have put the defendant’s case to the jury. ‘We cannot allow a summing up which puts the case so strongly against the prisoner to stand…’ . .
Cited – Rex v Canny 1945
Discussing the need for a judge not to sum up too strongly against a defendant: ‘in England a man is entitled to a fair trial by jury on any offence which is indictable. It does not matter how absurd the defence is, or how unlikely it is that any . .
Cited – Regina v Culbertson CCA 1970
The court disapproved of a jury being told that disbelieving a police officer would ruin his career. . .
Cited – Regina v Culbertson CCA 1970
The court disapproved of a jury being told that disbelieving a police officer would ruin his career. . .
Cited – Ibrahim v The King PC 6-Mar-1914
(Hong Kong) The defendant was an Afghan subject with the British Army in Hong Kong. He was accused of murder. Having accepted the protection of the British Armed forces, he became subject to their laws. In custody, he was asked about the offence by . .
Cited – Regina v Gilbey CACD 26-Jan-1990
The court warned judges about the need for a balanced summing up to the jury: ‘A judge . . is not entitled to comment in such a way as to make the summing up as a whole unbalanced . . It cannot be said too often or too strongly that a summing up . .
Cited – Rex v Betts and Ridley 1931
Betts and Ridley agreed to rob a man on thw way to the bank. Betts was to push him to the ground and snatch the bag, while Ridley waited nearby in a car. When snatching the bag, Betts struck the victim who later died. Betts and Ridley were both . .
Cited – Mears v Regina PC 1993
The prosecution case relied upon the evidence of a woman with whom the accused cohabited. The prosecution case was that the accused had told the woman that he had killed the victim in a particular way. The defendant denied killing the victim and . .
Cited – Regina v Wood CACD 11-Jul-1995
A newspaper’s pressure on jury to convict by suggesting other evidence, made the trial unfair. Suggestions of unfairness by judge in his summing up should only be made if supported by counsel at the trial. The degree of adverse comment allowed today . .
Cited – Rex v Jarmain CCA 1946
The defendant, in robbing him, pointed his cocked pistol at the cashier. He claimed that he was thinking what to do but had no intention of pressing the trigger, but the gun went off and killed her.
Held: Pointing a loaded pistol at a person . .
Cited – Regina v Powell (Anthony) and Another; Regina v English HL 30-Oct-1997
When the court looked at the issue of foreseeability of murder in an allegation of joint enterprise, there was no requirement to show intent by the secondary party. The forseeability of the risk of the principal committing the offence from the point . .
Cited – Regina v Uddin CACD 19-Mar-1998
A co-accused in a murder by a gang, where the existence of the murder weapon which was used, was outside the expectation of the defendant, need not himself be guilty, because of the different circumstances which applied in his case. . .
Cited – Regina v Whitehouse 1941
(British Columbia) The court asked when a party to a joint enterprise may claim to have abandoned or withdrawn from that enterprise ‘Can it be said on the facts of this case that a mere change of mental intention and a quitting of the scene of the . .
Cited – Regina v Whitefield 1984
The two accused agreed to break into a flat, but before entry was achieved, W said he withdrew. The other burgled the flat with another.
Held: The appeal was allowed. The judge was wrong to tell the jury that communication of his withdrawal to . .
Cited – Regina v Becerra and Cooper CACD 1975
The defendants sought leave to appeal against their convictions for a brutal and horrific murder. Becerra suggeste dtat he had wanted to withdraw from the event before the murder took place.
Held: The appeal failed: ‘ in the circumstances then . .

Cited by:

Followed – Ruth Ellis v Regina CACD 8-Dec-2003
In 1955, the deceased defendant was convicted of murder, and later hanged. The court considerd a post mortem appeal by the CRCC and her family. It was suggested that she should have been found guilty of manslaughter having been provoked by the . .
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 – Docherty, Regina v CACD 18-Jun-2014
The defendant appealed against his sentence to a term of imprisonment for public protection on his admission of wounding with intent. The sentencing system applied was replaced on the day following sentencing, and he said that the court should have . .
Cited – Boakye and Others, Regina v CACD 3-Apr-2012
The defendants appealed their sentences for importation of class A drugs. They had acted as drugs mules. New guidelines were due to take effect which be expected to have led to shorter sentences. The court was asked whether such new standards could . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Crime

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.155390

Behrendt v Burridge: QBD 1975

The defendant, a prostitute wearing revealing clothing sat silent and motionless behind a bay window, illuminated by a red light, to advertise her services as a prostitute.
Held: She was soliciting, in the sense of tempting or alluring prospective customers to visit her for the purposes of prostitution. No movement, signal or words were required. ‘In my judgment the facts here are conclusive against the defendant, and, as I see them, in the light of the law which is to be applied to them, there is but one answer. This young woman, sitting on a stool scantily clad, in a window bathed in red light and in an area where prostitutes were sought, might just as well have had at her feet an advertisement saying ‘I am a prostitute. I am ready and willing to give the service of a prostitute and my premises are now available for that purpose.’ It is clear, in my judgment, that she was soliciting in the sense of tempting or alluring prospective customers to come in for the purpose of prostitution and projecting her solicitation to passers-by.’

Judges:

Boreham J

Citations:

(1975) 63 Cr App R 202

Statutes:

Street Offences Act 1959 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Oddy, Regina (on the Application of) v Bugbugs Ltd Admn 12-Nov-2003
A private prosecutor appealed dismissal of his complaint that the respondent had operated an unlicensed man-powered rickshaw service. The district judge had held that it was not a taxi service. It was, under the 1869 Act a stage carriage and . .
Cited – Darroch v The Director of Public Prosecution CACD 1990
The appellant was charged with persistently soliciting a woman for the purposes of prostitution under section 2(1). He had been seen on several occasions driving his car slowly around a red light district. On one occasion he beckoned a woman towards . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.193385

Mohammed, Regina v: CACD 13 Jul 2005

The court granted permission to appeal against a conviction for murder on grounds that related to the judge’s summing up in respect of provocation: ‘Although Holley is a decision of the Privy Council and Morgan Smith a decision of the House of Lords, neither side has suggested that the law of England and Wales is other than as set out in the majority opinion set out in the majority opinion delivered by Lord Nicholls in Holley and we have no difficulty in proceeding on that basis’ Leave having been given, the appeal itself was dismissed: The jury should have been told that the applicant’s disposition for violence, if that is what they found that he had, could not assist him on that question; it was irrelevant. The jury, by their verdict, following the directions the judge had given them were satisfied, assuming the other criteria for provocation were met, that the applicant’s behaviour was not excusable so as to reduce the offence of murder to manslaughter. It is impossible to conclude that their verdict would have been any different if they had been directed on the tighter test, as explained in Holley. Accordingly, on the two grounds on which we have granted leave, the appeal is dismissed.’

Judges:

Scott Baker LJ, Gloster, Mettyear JJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Crim 1880

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Homicide Act 1957 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Not preferred – Regina v Smith (Morgan James) HL 27-Jul-2000
The defendant had sought to rely upon the defence of provocation. He had suffered serious clinical depression.
Held: When directing a jury on the law of provocation, it was no longer appropriate to direct the jury to disregard any particular . .
Preferred – Her Majestys Attorney General for Jersey v Holley PC 15-Jun-2005
(Jersey) The defendant appealed his conviction for murder, claiming a misdirection on the law of provocation. A chronic alcoholic, he had admitted killing his girlfriend with an axe. Nine law lords convened to seek to reconcile conflicting decisions . .
Cited – Regina (Director of Public Prosecutions) v Camplin HL 1978
The court considered the direction to be given as to the existence of provocation so as to reduce a charge of murder to one of manslaughter. The reasonable man in the definition should be one with the defendant’s mental condition. ‘The judge should . .
Cited – Rex v Kirkham 1837
In order to reduce Killing of a person to the crime of manslaughter, there must not only be sufficient provocation, but the jury must be satisfied that the fatal blow was given in consequence of that provocation. If A. had formed a deliberate design . .
Cited – Mancini v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 1941
There are exceptional cases to the rule in Woolmington for: ‘offences where onus of proof is specially dealt with by statute’. ‘There is no reason to repeat to the jury the warning as to reasonable doubt again and again, provided that the direction . .
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 Vye etc CACD 7-Apr-1993
Detailed guidance was given on good character directions, as to how and when they should be given, but: ‘Provided that the judge indicates to the jury the two respects in which good character may be relevant, ie credibility and propensity, this . .
Cited – Regina v Gray CACD 2004
The court gave guidance on appropriate good character directions where a defendant had old convictions. . .
Cited – Paria v The State PC 15-Apr-2003
PC (Trinidad and Tobago) The defendant appealed his conviction for an unprovoked serious assault after the judge had failed to give a propensity direction. . .

Cited by:

Cited – James, Regina v; Regina v Karimi CACD 25-Jan-2006
The defendants appealed their convictions for murder, saying that the court had not properly guided the jury on provocation. The court was faced with apparently conflicting decision of the House of Lords (Smith) and the Privy Council (Holley).
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.228948

Woolmington v Director of Public Prosecutions: HL 23 May 1935

Golden Thread of British Justice – Proof of Intent

The appellant had been convicted of the murder of his wife. She had left him and returned to live with her mother. He went to the house. He said he intended to frighten her that he would kill himself if she did not return. He wired a shotgun to allow this, and wrote a suicide note, but when attempting to show what he intended, the gun went off killing her. He denied intending to harm her. The judge directed the jury ‘The killing of a human being is homicide, however he may be killed, and all homicide is presumed to be malicious and murder, unless the contrary appears from circumstances of alleviation, excuse, or justification. ‘In every charge of murder, the fact of killing being first proved, all the circumstances of accident, necessity, or infirmity are to be satisfactorily proved by the prisoner, unless they arise out of the evidence produced against him; for the law presumeth the fact to have been founded in malice, unless the contrary appeareth.”
Held: The ‘golden thread’ of British justice is that it is for the prosecution to prove an offence against the defendant. ‘Juries are always told that, if conviction there is to be, the prosecution must prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.’ and ‘Throughout the web of the English Criminal Law one golden thread is always to be seen, that it is the duty of the prosecution to prove the prisoner’s guilt subject to what I have already said as to the defence of insanity and subject also to any statutory exception. If at the end of and on the whole of the case, there is a reasonable doubt, created by the evidence given by either the prosecution or the prisoner, as to whether the prisoner killed the deceased with a malicious intention, the prosecution has not made out the case and the prisoner is entitled to an acquittal. No matter what the charge or where the trial, the principle that the prosecution must prove the guilt of the prisoner is part of the common law of England and no attempt to whittle it down can be entertained.’ However the rule is subject to exceptions created by statute.
Viscount Sankey LC: ‘If at any period of a trial it was permissible for the judge to rule that the prosecution had established its case and that the onus was shifted on the prisoner to prove that he was not guilty and that unless he discharged that onus the prosecution was entitled to succeed, it would be enabling the judge in such a case to say that the jury must in law find the prisoner guilty and so make the judge decide the case and not the jury, which is not the common law.’

Judges:

Viscount Sankey LC, Lord Hewart LC, Lord Atkin, Lord Tomlin, and Lord Wright

Citations:

[1935] AC 462, [1935] UKHL 1, (1935) 5 New Zealand Police Law Reports 492, 104 LJKB 433

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Appeal Act 1907 1 4, Criminal Evidence Act 1898

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Daniel MNaghtens Case HL 1843
Daniel M’Naghten suffered from a mental disorder under which he believed that he was being persecuted by various bodies in authority, including the Tory Party. He sought to kill the Tory Prime Minister Sir Robert Peel, but shot and killed instead . .
Cited – Mackalley’s case 1611
If an officer or magistrate is killed when executing a process or preserving the peace, the offence is murder and remains so even if there is some defect in the process being executed, or the arrest was being made at night.
Constables were . .
Cited – Rex v Greenacre 1837
Once the prosecution has established that one person has died at the hand of another, it is for the defedant to establish by evidence or inference form the circumstances some excuse or mitigation to reduce the charge from murder. . .
Cited – Rex v Legg 1674
. .
Cited – Rex v Davies 1913
The consent of the Attorney General was not required to prosecute an offender under the 1901 Act. . .
Cited – Rex v Stoddart 1909
. .
Cited – Rex v Oneby 1727
Where A and B have a sudden violent quarrel, and later, after tempers should have cooled, A kills B, that is murder. If A says he will revenge himself on B, or will have his blood, that is express malice. The fact of killing is prima facie murder. . .
Cited – Rex v Schama; Rex v Abramovitch CCA 1914
Where the defendant was charged with receiving stolen goods well knowing them to be stolen, the onus of proof lies always on the prosecution. Once the prosection has established that the defendant was in possession of goods recently stolen, the jury . .
Cited – Lawrence v The King PC 1933
Lord Atkin said: ‘[A]n essential principle of our criminal law that the trial for an indictable offence has to be conducted in the presence of the accused; and for this purpose trial means the whole of the proceedings, including sentence.’ . .
Cited – Rex -v Sanders 1919
. .
Cited – Rex v Grinberg 1917
. .
Cited – Rex v Aubrey 1915
. .

Cited by:

Cited – Grant v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 22-Jan-2003
The appellant had been convicted of failing to give a breath test, and of driving with excess alcohol. He had falsely claimed that he had had a drink in the five minutes before being asked to take the test, and said the officer should not have . .
Cited – Regina v Derek William Bentley (Deceased) CACD 30-Jul-1998
The defendant had been convicted of murder in 1952, and hung. A court hearing an appeal after many years must apply laws from different eras to different aspects. The law of the offence (of murder) to be applied was that at the time of the offence. . .
Cited – George Worme Grenada Today Limited v The Commissioner of Police PC 29-Jan-2004
PC (Grenada) The defendant was editor of a newspaper which carried a story severely defamatory of the prime minister. He was convicted of criminal libel, and appealed.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. The . .
Cited – Mancini v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 1941
There are exceptional cases to the rule in Woolmington for: ‘offences where onus of proof is specially dealt with by statute’. ‘There is no reason to repeat to the jury the warning as to reasonable doubt again and again, provided that the direction . .
Cited – Regina v Lambert HL 5-Jul-2001
Restraint on Interference with Burden of Proof
The defendant had been convicted for possessing drugs found on him in a bag when he was arrested. He denied knowing of them. He was convicted having failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that he had not known of the drugs. The case was . .
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 – Michael Yearwood v The Queen PC 26-Jun-2001
PC (Grenada) The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder. He claimed a misdirection on provocation.
Held: The judge’s direction had been over elaborate, and gave too much weight to the old law. . .
Cited – Sheldrake v Director of Public Prosecutions; Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002 HL 14-Oct-2004
Appeals were brought complaining as to the apparent reversal of the burden of proof in road traffic cases and in cases under the Terrorism Acts. Was a legal or an evidential burden placed on a defendant?
Held: Lord Bingham of Cornhill said: . .
Cited – Wang, Regina v HL 10-Feb-2005
The appellant was waiting for a train when his bag was stolen. After a search, the thief tried to deter the appellant from calling the police by suggesting that the bag contained items the appellant should not be carrying. From the bag the appellant . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Regina v Hunt (Richard) HL 1987
The court objected to the insistence on leaving the burden throughout a prosecution on the defendant on the ground that ‘the discharge of an evidential burden proves nothing – it merely raises an issue’. The House emphasised the special nature of . .
Cited – Clarke v Regina CACD 23-Apr-2008
The defendant appealed his conviction for providing immigration services when not qualified to do so. . .
Cited – Regina v Moloney HL 21-Mar-1984
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder.
Held: The appeal was allowed and a conviction for manslaughter substituted.
Lord Bridge of Harwich discussed the case of Hyam: ‘But looking on their facts at the decided cases . .
Cited – Sweet v Parsley HL 23-Jan-1969
Mens Rea essential element of statutory Offence
The appellant had been convicted under the Act 1965 of having been concerned in the management of premises used for smoking cannabis. This was a farmhouse which she visited infrequently. The prosecutor had conceded that she was unaware that the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Leading Case

Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.179641

Moses, Regina v: CACD 28 Jun 2006

Reference by the Criminal Cases Review Commission under section 9 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1995 based upon what the Commission identified at the date that it made the reference as a possible misdirection by the judge as to provocation

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Crim 1721

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.270247

Delaval’s Case: 1763

The defendant was convicted for outraging public decency, having procuring a girl for the purposes of prostitution.

Citations:

(1763) 3 Burr 1434

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Hamilton, Regina v CACD 16-Aug-2007
The defendant appealed his conviction for outraging public decency. He had surreptitously filmed up the skirts of women in a supermarket. The offence was only discovered after the films were found on a search of his home for other material. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.258777

Crunden’s Case: 1809

The defendant went bathing at Brighton; he was seen as he undressed and swam in the sea. He was convicted of outraging decency for exposing his naked person in presence of people.
Held: By exposing his naked person he was guilty of a misdemeanour, as it outraged public decency. ‘The law will not tolerate such an exhibition. Whatever his intention might be, the necessary tendency of his conduct was to outrage public decency and to corrupt public morals.’ It was no defence that people had previously bathed there naked before the houses were built: ‘Whatever becomes the habitation of civilised men, there the laws of decency must be enforced.’

Judges:

McDonald CB

Citations:

(1809) 2 Camp 89

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Hamilton, Regina v CACD 16-Aug-2007
The defendant appealed his conviction for outraging public decency. He had surreptitously filmed up the skirts of women in a supermarket. The offence was only discovered after the films were found on a search of his home for other material. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.258776

Regina v Holmes: 1853

The defendant had exposed himself on a bus. He was indicted for exposing himself in a public vehicle frequented and used by divers subjects of the Queen ‘to the view of’ them and in a second count for exposing himself in a public place. It was contended that there was no offence because the bus was not a public place so as to constitute a nuisance.
Held: A full court of five judges considered the case.
Lord Campbell CJ said: ‘It would be a disgrace to the law if we had any doubt that both counts are good. The defendant exposed himself in a public omnibus in the New Road in the presence of several women and this country would not be a fit place to live in if this were not an offence.’
Parke B held that the omnibus was a public place and exposure to more than one person was an offence.

Judges:

Lord Campbell CJ, Parke B

Citations:

(1853) 1 Dears 207

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Hamilton, Regina v CACD 16-Aug-2007
The defendant appealed his conviction for outraging public decency. He had surreptitously filmed up the skirts of women in a supermarket. The offence was only discovered after the films were found on a search of his home for other material. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.258781

Rex v Orchard and Thurtle: 1848

(Old Bailey) The defendants were each charged with exposure to each other and the commission of lewd acts in a urinal in a market which was alleged to be a public place; no one could see in from the outside. The prosecution argued that if the defendants committed an act in a place where the public could enter and witness what was happening then that was sufficient.
Held: The place was not a public place for the purpose of the offence as everyone who entered had to expose himself and exposure to one person was not enough.

Judges:

Cresswell J

Citations:

(1848) 3 Cox CC 248

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Hamilton, Regina v CACD 16-Aug-2007
The defendant appealed his conviction for outraging public decency. He had surreptitously filmed up the skirts of women in a supermarket. The offence was only discovered after the films were found on a search of his home for other material. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.258780

Regina v Thallman: 1863

Thallman had exposed himself on the roof of a house in Albemarle Street, Piccadilly opposite to a window in a house where females lived. He was indicted for doing this in the ‘sight and view’ of those who lived opposite and of those going along the public highway. His actions could not be seen from the street but only from the windows of neighbouring houses. He was convicted, but argued that the exposure was not visible to anyone passing along the street and therefore was not in a public place.
Held: It was not necessary that the exposure be on a public highway. ‘If it is in a place where a number of the Queen’s subjects can and do see the exposure, that is sufficient’.

Citations:

(1863) 9 Cox CC 388

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Hamilton, Regina v CACD 16-Aug-2007
The defendant appealed his conviction for outraging public decency. He had surreptitously filmed up the skirts of women in a supermarket. The offence was only discovered after the films were found on a search of his home for other material. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.258784

Regina v Daly: 1968

The court considered the availability of mistake as to consent as a defence to a charge of rape: ‘What the learned trial judge did in the present case was to omit from the definition of rape that he gave to the jury all reference to the element of intention … but to tell the jury that it was a defence to the charge of rape if the accused honestly believed on reasonable grounds that the girl was consenting. He also told them that the Crown had to satisfy them beyond reasonable doubt that the accused did not have such a belief. Even if it were proper to discuss the mental aspect of a charge of rape in terms of a defence of reasonable mistake of fact, this direction as to onus would be erroneous.’

Judges:

Smith J

Citations:

(1968) VLR 257

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Commonwealth

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.258680

regina v Elliot and White: 1861

The defendants appealed their convictions for exposing themselves on Wandsworth Common. The indictment charged them with doing so in the ‘sight and view’ of divers others. There was evidence that they had sexual intercourse on the common, but not that it was seen by anyone other than a single witness or within the possible sight and view of anyone else who was shown to be there. Though their act could have been seen by others on the common or a public footway or footbridge, there was no evidence that there were persons on the common or the footway or footbridge at the time. The jury were directed that they could convict if the acts could be seen without difficulty by others. They argued that the exposure had to be public in the sense of being to the offence or injury of more than one person. The Crown argued that an indecent exposure was indictable whether seen by others or not, as they exposed themselves where they might have been seen.
Held: Although one judge suggested that all open lewdness was indictable as outraging public decency, the argument centred on the question whether a conviction could be upheld, as there was no evidence that anyone other than the single witness was passing at the time and therefore might have seen it. The court of 5 judges disagreed amongst themselves; it was to be re-argued, but the report notes that the court subsequently decided that it was not desirable to do so and no judgment was delivered.
Weightman J noted: ‘The case depends on this question, Could the parties be convicted if no one saw them, as for instance, upon their own confession merely?’

Judges:

Weightman J

Citations:

(1861) Le and Ca 103

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Hamilton, Regina v CACD 16-Aug-2007
The defendant appealed his conviction for outraging public decency. He had surreptitously filmed up the skirts of women in a supermarket. The offence was only discovered after the films were found on a search of his home for other material. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.258782

Shillibier v Regina: CACD 6 Apr 2006

Appeal from conviction of murder: ‘whether the judge erred in admitting into evidence the police questioning of the appellant that was conducted at a time when he was treated as a volunteer rather than as a suspect and he was not given a full caution.
Secondly, there is an application to add a further ground of appeal based on fresh evidence. This concerns the reliability of expert evidence given at trial concerning similarities between mud stains on seat covers from the appellant’s car and samples of mud taken from the area where the body of the deceased was recovered.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Richards

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Crim 793

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.240368

Sahota, Regina v: CACD 5 Apr 2006

Appeal from conviction of doing an act with intent to pervert the course of public justice. Misidentification of driver in serious road accident.

Judges:

Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Crim 903

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.241499

Munah Binti Ali v Public Prosecutor: 1958

(Court of Appeal of Malaya) Thomson CJ: ‘it is quite clear that the expression ’causes a woman with child to miscarry’ means to cause her to lose from the womb prematurely the products of conception and . . therefore there can be no offence under the section unless there are products of conception’.

Judges:

Thomson CJ, Whyatt CJ(S) and Good J

Citations:

(1958) 24 MLJ 159

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina (Smeaton) v Secretary of State for Health and Others Admn 18-Apr-2002
The claimant challenged the Order as regards the prescription of the morning-after pill, asserting that the pill would cause miscarriages, and that therefore the use would be an offence under the 1861 Act.
Held: ‘SPUC’s case is that any . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.223715

Rex v Legg: 1674

Citations:

(1674) Kelyng 27

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Woolmington v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 23-May-1935
Golden Thread of British Justice – Proof of Intent
The appellant had been convicted of the murder of his wife. She had left him and returned to live with her mother. He went to the house. He said he intended to frighten her that he would kill himself if she did not return. He wired a shotgun to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.223125

Rex v Greenacre: 1837

Once the prosecution has established that one person has died at the hand of another, it is for the defedant to establish by evidence or inference form the circumstances some excuse or mitigation to reduce the charge from murder.

Citations:

(1837) 8 CandP 35

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Woolmington v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 23-May-1935
Golden Thread of British Justice – Proof of Intent
The appellant had been convicted of the murder of his wife. She had left him and returned to live with her mother. He went to the house. He said he intended to frighten her that he would kill himself if she did not return. He wired a shotgun to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.223123

Buckler’s Case: 1551

The indictment read that the defendant on a charge of murder had ‘feloniously struck, killed, and murdered’ the victim.
Held: The words were sufficient without an allegation of ‘malice aforethought’. The word murder implies ‘malice aforethought’.

Citations:

(1551) 1 Dyer 68, 73 ER 145

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.223122

Regina v Allan: CACD 6 Apr 2001

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Crim 1027, Unreported, 6 April 2001

Statutes:

Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Attorney General’s Reference (No 5 of 2002) HL 14-Oct-2004
The Attorney General sought the correct interpretation of section 17 where a court was asked as to whether evidence obtained from a telephone tapping had been taken from a public or private network. A chief constable suspected that the defendants, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.216531

Rex v Stratton: 1779

It was just possible to imagine cases in which the expediency of breaking the law was so overwhelming that people might be justified in breaking it. The rule could be extended to cases of treason upon a general principle that it could to be extended to other classes of crime.

Judges:

Lord Mansfield

Citations:

(1779) 21 How St Tr 1045

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Attorney-General v Whelan 20-Dec-1933
(Court of Criminal Appeal – Ireland) The appellant had been tried as part of a conspiracy to steal and to receive stolen good. He was acquitted of the conspiracy, but now appealed against his conviction for theft despite his assertion that he acted . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.213661

Oldcastle’s Case: 1419

In a case of treason immediate fear of death can be a justification.

Citations:

Hale, “Pleas of the Crown” Vol 1 p 50

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Attorney-General v Whelan 20-Dec-1933
(Court of Criminal Appeal – Ireland) The appellant had been tried as part of a conspiracy to steal and to receive stolen good. He was acquitted of the conspiracy, but now appealed against his conviction for theft despite his assertion that he acted . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.213662

Regina v Fletcher: 1859

A conviction for rape was upheld in respect of sexual intercourse with a girl of weak intellect. The jury found that she was incapable of giving consent due to her defect of reasoning.

Citations:

(1859) Bell CC 63, [1859] 169 ER 1168

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.196594

Crouther’s case: 1599

A constable was indicted for refusing to make a hue and cry after notice of a burglary committed in the night.

Citations:

(1599) 2 Hawk PC 116

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Attorney General’s Reference (No 3 of 2003) CACD 7-Apr-2004
Police Officers had been acquitted of misconduct in public office. They had stood by in a police station custody suite as a prisoner lay on the floor and died.
Held: The trial took place before R -v- G which had overruled Caldwell. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.196543

Regina v Levi Warman: 1846

An indictment for murder, by inflicting a mortal wound, is supported by proof of a blow, which caused an internal breach of the skin, though externally there were only the appearances of a bruise. Quaere, Whether such an allegation would have been sufficient in an indictment on the statute for cutting or wounding, with intent to murder.

Judges:

Alderson B

Citations:

[1846] EngR 179, (1846) 1 Den 183, [1846] 169 ER 203

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Applied – J J C (A Minor) v Eisenhower QBD 1983
The defendant shot an airgun at a group of people. He hit someone just below the eye, causing bruising, but not breaking the skin. One blood vessel at least below the skin burst.
Held: His conviction was set aside. A conviction under section . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.194928

Regina v Atkinson: 1 Mar 1985

Jury Directions in diminished responsibility case.

Citations:

[1985] Cr LR 314

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.179635

Bernard Keck and Daniel Mithouard (Rec 1993,p I-6097) (SV93-431) (Judgment): ECJ 24 Nov 1993

Free movement of goods – Prohibition of resale at a loss. A national law is fair if the rules it applies deal equally to imported and home goods.
Europa Free movement of goods – Quantitative restrictions – Measures having equivalent effect – Concept – Obstacles to trade resulting from disparities between national legislation laying down requirements to be met by goods – Included.
Obstacles resulting from national provisions regulating selling arrangements in a non-discriminatory way – Inapplicability of Article 30 of the Treaty – Legislation prohibiting resale at a loss.

Citations:

Times 25-Nov-1993, C-267/91, [1993] EUECJ C-267/91, [1993] ECR I-6097, [1995] 1 CMLR 101

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

EEC Treaty Art. 30

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Scotch Whisky Association and Others v The Lord Advocate and Another SC 15-Nov-2017
The Association challenged the imposition of minimum pricing systems for alcohol, saying that it was in breach of European law. After a reference to the ECJ, the Court now considered its legality.
Held: The Association’s appeal failed. Minimum . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commercial, Crime

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.160797

Varley and Others, Regina v: CACD 21 Jun 2019

Prosecution appeal by the Appellant (‘the SFO’) under s.58 and following of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 against a Ruling together with other related rulings), in which he upheld the various submissions of the Respondents that there was no case to answer in respect of the count/s of the indictment which concerned each of them.

Citations:

[2019] EWCA Crim 1074

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.650533

Flook, Regina v: CACD 8 Jul 2009

Appeal: ‘i) Did the Crown comply with its obligations in respect of disclosure of documents held by the police and other government authorities in South Africa?
ii) Did the judge set out in his summing up evidence in relation to the practices of HMRC which had not been given at the trial?
iii) Did the summing up set out the defence case and was it fair and balanced?’

Judges:

Lord Justice Thomas

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Crim 682, [2010] 1 Cr App Rep 30, [2010] Crim LR 148

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.415065

Hakala, Regina v: CACD 19 Mar 2002

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Crim 730, [2002] Crim LR 578

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: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.269993

NW and Others, Regina v: CACD 23 Jan 2008

The prosecutor appealed from a terminal ruling, acceding to a submission of no case to answer advanced on behalf of all four defendants.
Proof to the criminal standard can be discharged by circumstantial evidence and then by inference: ‘No doubt, if such an inference is prima facie there to be drawn, an evidential burden is cast on the defendant to show that after all the inference is wrong: there is another explanation for the defendant’s dealing with the property. But it is surely commonplace that the presence of such an evidential burden does not reposition the legal burden of proof.’

Judges:

Laws LJ, David Clarke, Lloyd Jones JJ

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Crim 2, [2009] 1 WLR 965, [2008] Lloyds Rep FC 163, [2008] 3 All ER 533

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Proceeds of Crime Act 2002

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Wiese v The UK Border Agency Admn 29-Jun-2012
The claimant challenged a decision to seize a sustantial sum of cash being carried by him whilst passing through London City Airport. In the magistrates court, the claimant had objected to the reliance on parts of a customs officer’s statement which . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.263810

T, Regina v: CACD 16 May 2007

The defendant appealed his conviction for murder. He complained of the wrongful admission against him of a letter written by another defendant, and that the judge had allowed the jury to get a misleading impression of proceedings against others involved.
Held: The admission of the letter had been neither incorrect nor significant, and the jury had not been misled as to proceedings against other defendants. He had in any event been charged on the basis of his close involvement in the acts either of himself or of others. The appeal was dismissed.

Judges:

Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers LCJ, Henriques J, Teare J

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Crim 1250

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.253319

Green, Regina v: CACD 25 May 2007

Two defendants had been convicted as principals of conspiracy to supply drugs. The defendant appealed a confiscation order.
Held: Where the two defendants had been convicted of jointly receiving the proceeds, each defendant was properly made subject to a confiscation order for the entire amount.

Judges:

Moore-Bick LJ, David Clarke and Swift JJ

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Crim 1248, Times 15-Jun-2007, [2007] 3 All ER 751

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Green HL 14-May-2008
The appellant had been found to have received criminal proceeds along with another. He appealed against an order making him liable for the full amount.
Held: The appeal failed. The defendant’s argument did not face the finding that he had been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.253317

Regina v Danger: 1857

The defendant was charged with obtaining a valuable security by false pretences, on the basis that he had presented a bill to the prosecutor who accepted it and returned it to the defendant, his acceptance having been induced by false pretences on the part of the defendant.
Held: In these circumstances the defendant was not guilty of the offence because, before the document came into his possession, the prosecutor had no property in the document as a security, nor even in the paper on which the acceptance was written. Lord Campbell CJ: ‘… we apprehend that to support the indictment the document must have been a valuable security while in the hands of the prosecutor. While it was in the hands of the prosecutor it was of no value to him nor to any one else, unless to the prisoner. In obtaining it the prisoner was guilty of a gross fraud, but we think not of a fraud contemplated by this Act of Parliament (7 and 8 Geo. 4, c. 29, s. 53).’

Judges:

Lord Campbell CJ

Citations:

(1857) 7 Cox CC 303

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Preddy; Regina v Slade; Regina v Dhillon (Conjoined Appeals) HL 10-Jul-1996
The appellants were said to have made false mortgage applications. They appealed convictions for dishonestly obtaining property by deception.
Held: A chose in action created by an electronic bank transfer was not property which was capable of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.248438

Browning v Watson: 1953

Citations:

[1953] 2 All ER 775

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Sang HL 25-Jul-1979
The defendant appealed against an unsuccessful application to exclude evidence where it was claimed there had been incitement by an agent provocateur.
Held: The appeal failed. There is no defence of entrapment in English law. All evidence . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.250470

Brannan v Peek: 1948

Citations:

[1948] 1 KB 68

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Sang HL 25-Jul-1979
The defendant appealed against an unsuccessful application to exclude evidence where it was claimed there had been incitement by an agent provocateur.
Held: The appeal failed. There is no defence of entrapment in English law. All evidence . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.250469

Regina v Tchorzoewski: 1858

The defendant was accused of inciting the murder of the Emperor of France. The Attorney -General asked the court to accept undertakings from the defendant on entry of a directed verdict of not guilty.
Held: The undertakings were accepted: Lord Campbell CJ: ‘The defendant being a foreigner, I will only add what I have before observed, that it is the glory of this country that it affords an asylum to proscribed and persecuted exiles from all parts of the world. But those who find an asylum here must ever bear in mind that while they have the protection of the law of England they are bound to obey that law, and that they are equally liable with the subjects of Her Majesty for any crime which may be committed by them while they are resident within the realm. I hope they will bear this in mind and will understand that it is a crime on the part of a British subject, or for a foreigner owing temporary allegiance to the Crown of England, to plot and conspire for the commission of a crime in a foreign country, or for the commission of a crime in this country.’

Judges:

Lord Campbell CJ

Citations:

(1858) 8 St Tr NS1091

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Abu Hamza CACD 28-Nov-2006
The defendant had faced trial on terrorist charges. He claimed that delay and the very substantial adverse publicity had made his fair trial impossible, and that it was not an offence for a foreign national to solicit murders to be carried out . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.247650

E v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 26 Feb 2002

A youth court remanded the appellant to a local authority with a requirement that the local authority detain him in secure accommodation. No such accommodation was however available. He was brought back to the Youth Court by a member of the youth offending team but he then absconded. He was later convicted of escape. An appeal by way of case stated contended that there was no evidence upon which the justices could properly find that he was in lawful custody. This issue was held to be a question of fact: ‘Custody was an English word which should be given its ordinary and natural meaning namely ‘confinement, imprisonment, durance’ subject to any special meaning given to it by statute. For a person to be in custody his liberty had to be subject to such constraint or restriction that he could be said to be confined by another in the sense that the person’s immediate freedom of movement was under the direct control of another . .’
As regards the constraints involved on the facts, and the defendant’s knowledge of them, the report goes on: ‘The order made by the justices in the present case whereby the appellant was remanded was custodial in nature not only did it remand him into the care of the local authority but it also required that he be placed in secure accommodation. Such a remand was so restrictive of the appellant’s liberty that it could properly be said to be custodial in nature. The lawfulness of the regime which was thereafter applied to the Appellant in the period of remand was established by that order. The appellant was at all times fully aware of that fact. . . ‘

Judges:

Forbes J

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 433 (Admin), [2002] Crim LR 737

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Dhillon, Regina v CACD 23-Nov-2005
The defendant had been arrested and then taken to hospital for treatment. On completion of his treatment, he could not find the constable, so went home. He now appealed from conviction of escape contrary to common law.
Held: The prosecution . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.241516

Porter, Regina v: CACD 16 Mar 2006

The defendant appealed his conviction of possession of indecent photographs or pseudo-photographs of children. The images had been deleted, and were irrecoverable, but they had originally been viewed through a program which created a smaller additional image for each original. Though the thumbnail images were no longer accessible without the original, they remained on the computer.
Held: The defendant could not be found to be in possession of pictures which were not accessible to him without specialised recovery software not available to him: ‘In the special case of deleted computer images, if a person cannot retrieve or gain access to an image, in our view he no longer has custody or control of it. He has put it beyond his reach just as does a person who destroys or otherwise gets rid of a hard copy photograph. For this reason, it is not appropriate to say that a person who cannot retrieve an image from the hard disk drive is in possession of the image because he is in possession of the hard disk drive and the computer. ‘

Judges:

Dyson LJ, Grigson J, Walker J

Citations:

Times 21-Jun-2006, [2006] EWCA Crim 560, [2006] 1 WLR 2633, [2006] 2 Cr App Rep 25, [2007] 2 All ER 625

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1988 160(1), Protection of Children Act 1978 1(1)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Warner v Metropolitan Police Commissioner HL 1968
The appellant had been convicted of an offence contrary to section 1 of the 1964 Act, of having been found in possession of drugs.
Held: (Reid dissenting) The prosecution had only to prove that the accused knew of the existence of the thing . .
Cited – Atkins v Director of Public Prosecutions; Goodland v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 8-Mar-2000
For possession of an indecent image of a child to be proved, it was necessary to establish some knowledge of its existence. Images stored without the defendant’s knowledge by browser software in a hidden cache, of which he was also unaware, were not . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Brooks PC 1974
The defendant appealed against a conviction for the possession of drugs.
Held: ‘In the ordinary use of the word ‘possession’, one has in one’s possession whatever is, to one’s knowledge, physically in one’s custody or under one’s physical . .
Cited – Regina v Boyesen HL 1982
The House considered the meaning of possession.
Held: Lord Scarman: ‘Possession is a deceptively simple concept. It denotes a physical control or custody of a thing plus knowledge that you have it in your custody or control.’ . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.239144

Dillon v The Queen: PC 25 Jan 1982

(Jamaica) The appellant police officer had been convicted that by his negligence he had allowed two prisoners to escape from custody. Given doubt that they were in fact lawfully in custody he argued that there was an onus on the prosecution to establish that there was a lawful custody from which to escape. There was no affirmative evidence that the prisoners had ever been lawfully detained.
Held: The appeal was allowed. The courts will not allow a point central to the allegation to be presumed.
Lord Fraser said: ‘Their Lordships are of the opinion that it was essential for the Crown to establish that the arrest and detention were lawful and that the omission to do so was fatal to the conviction of the defendant. . . The lawfulness of the detention was a necessary precondition for the offence of permitting escape, and it is well established that the courts will not presume the existence of facts which are central to an offence . . It has to be remembered that in every case where a police officer commits the offence of negligently permitting a prisoner to escape from lawful custody, the prisoner himself commits an offence by escaping and it would be contrary to the fundamental principles of law that the onus should be upon a prisoner to rebut a presumption that he was being lawfully detained which he could only do by the (notoriously difficult) process of proving a negative.’

Judges:

Lord Fraser

Citations:

[1982] AC 484, [1982] UKPC 1a, (1982) 74 Cr App R 274, [1982] 2 WLR 538, [1982] 1 All ER 1017, [1982] Crim LR 438

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Dhilon (Pritpal) CACD 23-Nov-2005
The defendant appealed his conviction for escaping from lawful custody. He had been arrested, but then taken to and left at a local hospital. No officer stayed with him, and he later left and went home.
Held: His appeal succeeded. All the . .
Cited – Dhillon, Regina v CACD 23-Nov-2005
The defendant had been arrested and then taken to hospital for treatment. On completion of his treatment, he could not find the constable, so went home. He now appealed from conviction of escape contrary to common law.
Held: The prosecution . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.236330

Regina v Timmis: CACD 1976

The defendant had been stopped as a result of erratic driving and breathalysed. The test proving positive, the defendant was told that we would be taken in custody to a police station and he was placed in a police car. He was then left alone for some considerable time whereafter he got out of the car and walked into a public house on the opposite side of the road where he remained for about an hour.
At some stage the police followed him but could not find him, although it was not suggested he was actively seeking to conceal himself. The defendant in due course gave himself up at the police station and he was charged with escape. A motion to dismiss the ensuing indictment was refused.
Held: The offence of escape from lawful custody is not limited to those who escape from prison, or remand centres, or similar institutions following an order of the sentencing court, or for that matter following a remand in custody, but that it does extend to those who do so after they have been arrested by the police.

Citations:

[1976] Crim LR 129

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Dhilon (Pritpal) CACD 23-Nov-2005
The defendant appealed his conviction for escaping from lawful custody. He had been arrested, but then taken to and left at a local hospital. No officer stayed with him, and he later left and went home.
Held: His appeal succeeded. All the . .
Cited – Dhillon, Regina v CACD 23-Nov-2005
The defendant had been arrested and then taken to hospital for treatment. On completion of his treatment, he could not find the constable, so went home. He now appealed from conviction of escape contrary to common law.
Held: The prosecution . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.236328

Dhillon, Regina v: CACD 23 Nov 2005

The defendant had been arrested and then taken to hospital for treatment. On completion of his treatment, he could not find the constable, so went home. He now appealed from conviction of escape contrary to common law.
Held: The prosecution must in a case concerning escape prove four things: –
i) that the defendant was in custody;
ii) that the defendant knew that he was in custody (or at least was reckless as to whether he was or not);
iii) that the custody was lawful; and
iv) that the defendant intentionally escaped from that lawful custody.
‘This was a case arising from events some six years earlier. It raised issues of some difficulty against an unusual factual background. A careful direction on the law and a consequential careful identification of the relevant issues was called for. Taking the summing up both in its constituent parts and as a whole does not, in our judgment, match up to these requirements. We are unable to conclude that the conviction was safe and it must be quashed.’

Judges:

Mr Justice David Steel

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Crim 2996, [2006] 1 Cr App Rep 15, [2006] 2 WLR 1535

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Timmis CACD 1976
The defendant had been stopped as a result of erratic driving and breathalysed. The test proving positive, the defendant was told that we would be taken in custody to a police station and he was placed in a police car. He was then left alone for . .
Cited – Dillon v The Queen PC 25-Jan-1982
(Jamaica) The appellant police officer had been convicted that by his negligence he had allowed two prisoners to escape from custody. Given doubt that they were in fact lawfully in custody he argued that there was an onus on the prosecution to . .
Cited – E v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 26-Feb-2002
A youth court remanded the appellant to a local authority with a requirement that the local authority detain him in secure accommodation. No such accommodation was however available. He was brought back to the Youth Court by a member of the youth . .
Cited – Regina v Rumble CACD 2003
The defendant had surrendered to his bail at a Magistrates Court. There was no usher and no security staff. Following imposition of a custodial sentence, the defendant escaped through the public entrance. It was submitted on an appeal that the . .
Cited – H, Regina (on the Application Of) v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 4-Apr-2003
Appeal from conviction of an offence of escape from lawful custody contrary to common law. The central issue in the case is whether at material time when the appellant admittedly absconded he had escaped from lawful custody. The appellant was aged . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.236591

Regina v Hibberd: 22 Feb 2001

(Court of Appeal, New Zealand) The defendant was charged with offences of indecent assault against children. Certain Acts would have constituted more serious assaults, but were cot charged as such being time barred.

Citations:

[2001] 2 NZLR 211

Links:

Austlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v J HL 14-Oct-2004
The defendant was to have been accused of having unlawful sexual intercourse with a girl under 16. Proceedings could not be brought, because the allegation was more than a year old, and he was instead accused of indecent assault, but on the same . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.216524

Regina v Roberts: 1990

Citations:

[1990] CLR 122

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Smith (Wallace Duncan), Regina v (No 4) CACD 17-Mar-2004
The defendant appealed convictions for fraudulent trading and obtaining property by deception, saying that the English court could not prosecute an offence committed principally in the US.
Held: Provided some substantial element (here the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.196570

Sookermany v Director of Public Prosecutions: 1 May 1996

The Court of Appeal of Trinidad and Tobago dismissed an appeal against refusal of constitutional relief claimed on the ground of undue delay:- ‘As there are admittedly measures available to a trial judge to negative the prejudicial effect on the defence of delay, there would seem to me to be no reason why a court following the lead given by the Board in [Boodram] should not in all but the most exceptional circumstances refuse to stay criminal proceedings on a constitutional motion brought for that purpose, and leave it for the trial judge to determine what measures he should take to counteract the prejudicial effect of the delay and if he should conclude that no effective counteraction is possible, himself to order the proceedings stayed.’

Judges:

de la Bastide CJ

Citations:

(1996) 48 WIR 346

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Mentioned – Boodhoo, Jagram, (suing on behalf of themselves and the Sanatan Dharma Sudhar Sadha) v The Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago PC 1-Apr-2004
PC (Trinidad and Tobago) The complainant said that his constitutional rights had been infringed by the court’s delay. Proceedings had begun in 1987 for redress with regard to a land dispute. There was substantial . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions and others v Tokai and others PC 12-Jun-1996
(Trinidad and Tobago) The appellant had been charged in 1981 with offences alleged to have been committed shortly before. The proceedings continued until his appeal for one was dismissed in 1988. The wounding charges were proceeded with only in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.195701