Category: Crime

Aderemi, Regina v: CACD 9 May 2018

Appeal against total sentence of fourteen months’ imprisonment for possession of false identity document and for working whilst disqualified for immigration status.

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Crim 1502

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.620153

Taj v Regina: CACD 24 Jul 2018

The defendant appealed his conviction for murder. He had stopped to help a motorist who appeared to have broken own in a smoking vehicle on the Albert Embankment in central London. He became suspicious of a bomb and called the police. The police came and left. The defendant retained his suspicions and himself returned, and again fearing a terrorist attack, assaulted the driver, fatally wounding him. He had a history of drug abuse and under the influence at the time, and of mental illness but was fit to stand trial. His plea of mistaken self defence under the 2008 Act was withdrawn by the judge.
Held: Appalls against conviction and sentence were refused.

Judges:

Sir Brian Leveson P QBD, Gross, Davis LJJ, Sir Petr Openshaw.

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Crim 1743

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 76(4)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.620166

Jones v Regina: CACD 10 Jul 2018

Applications for disclosure made several years after trial and conviction for murder and dismissal of first appeal.
Held: Refused: ‘ the fresh evidence of alibi is completely devoid of credibility. It does not satisfy the criteria in Section 23 of the 1968 Act. With that conclusion the entire edifice of the applicant’s case collapses. His grounds of appeal are unarguable. We refuse his application for leave to appeal against conviction.’

Citations:

[2018] EWHC Crim 1599

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.619872

Tietchem, Regina v: CACD 17 Apr 2018

Appeal from conviction for assisting unlawful immigration by means of sham marriage. Defence that marriage was real.

Judges:

Sir Brian Leveson P QBD, Turner, May DBE JJ

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Crim 880

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.609742

Tesfazgi, Regina v: CACD 17 Apr 2018

Appeal from conviction for aggravated vehicle taking, possession of a prohibited firearm and possession of an article with a blade or point.

Judges:

Sir Brian Leveson P QBD, Turner, May DBE JJ

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Crim 881

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.609741

Rana, Regina v: CACD 11 Apr 2018

Appeal from conviction for arson, with new evidence based upon cell phone location signals.
Held: The appeal succeeded.

Judges:

Lord Burnett of Maldon LCJ, Carr DBE, Phillips JJ

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Crim 725

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.608713

M Najib and Sons Ltd v Crown Prosecution Service: CACD 26 Apr 2018

The company appealed against its conviction under the 2010 Regulation for failing to provide the required assistance for the taking of samples by an inspector. The company admitted the facts but said that the cost of compliance was too high, and unfairly distributed.
Held:

Judges:

Leggatt LJ, McGowan DBE J, Sir Peter Openshaw

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Crim 909, [2018] WLR(D) 258

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies (England) Regulations 2010

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Chalkley, Jeffries CACD 19-Dec-1997
The 1995 Act will not permit the Court of Appeal to allow an appeal where a conviction was safe but there was a substantial procedural unfairness. In order to understand the role of pre-1 January 1996 jurisprudence in applying what is now the . .

Cited by:

See Also – Najib and Sons Ltd v Crown Prosecution Service CACD 3-Jul-2018
The defendant applied for its costs. It had been convicted for a breach of the Regulations, but the Inspector had not had the power to make the request it had denied.
Held: ‘The present case is one in which the prosecution failed as a matter . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Animals

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.609502

Terry, Regina v: CACD 1 Mar 2018

Renewed application for leave to appeal out of time from conviction for murder.
Held: Leave refused.

Judges:

Treacy LJ, Nicol J, Munro QC HHJ

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Crim 416

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.608709

Regina v Clarke: CACD 1985

A sub-machine gun was found. It was incomplete, without trigger, pivot pin or magazine, but had been designed for fully-automatic fire only. It could be operated by use of a piece of string tied across the ‘sear’ (the catch keeping the hammer at full or half-cock) and around the trigger guard so that by applying tension to the string the gun could be operated. The Court disapproved Jobling [1981] Crim L R 625 and relied on the decision of the Court of Appeal in Pannell. The words in s.5(1)(a) were descriptive of the kind of firearm which is prohibited rather than descriptive of an individual weapon at the very time the accused was alleged to have been in possession of it (313). However a weapon might become so damaged or altered, by accident or design or by the removal of so many components, that it could no longer fairly be described as a ‘weapon’ (313). Alternatively, the gun, even after the trigger, pivot pin and magazine had been removed, was a component part of a prohibited weapon.

Citations:

[1985] 82 Cr App R 308

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Disapproved – Regina v Jobling CACD 1981
The court considered an appeal against a conviction for possession of a prohibited automatic weapon.
Held: It was insufficient to ask whether the weapon was originally designed to fire continuously; the question was whether it remained so. . .
Applied – Regina v Pannell CACD 1982
The defendant had been found in possession of the disassembled parts for three prohibited automatic firearms.
Held: The appeal failed despite the fact that the ability of the carbines to fire automatically required an operation of some . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.462422

Smith, Regina v: CACD 26 Jul 2007

There had been admissions of pleas of guilty to robbery and the production of a firearm with intent to commit robbery, in the case of a co-accused who was alleged jointly to be involved. The court considered the admissibility of a co-defendant’s plea of guilty.

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Crim 2105

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 2003 74

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Girma and Others, Regina v (Rev 1) CACD 15-May-2009
The court asked whether the conviction of a co-defendant was correctly admitted as evidence against her co-accused, and if not what was the effect on the fairness of the trial.
Held: The plea of the co-defendant should not have been admitted. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.259780

Attorney General’s Reference No 2 of 1999: CACD 15 Feb 2000

The court’s opinion was sought in relation to two questions referred by the Attorney General under s36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1972:
1. can a defendant be properly convicted of manslaughter by gross negligence in the absence of evidence as to that defendant’s state of mind?
2. can a non-human defendant be convicted of the crime of manslaughter by gross negligence in the absence of evidence establishing the guilt of an identified human individual for the same crime?

Judges:

Rose LJ VP, Potts, Curtis JJ

Citations:

[2000] 2 Cr App Rep 207, [2000] EWCA Crim 91, [2000] IRLR 417, [2001] BCC 210, [2000] 3 WLR 195, [2000] Crim LR 475, [2000] 3 All ER 182, [2000] QB 796, [2000] 2 BCLC 257

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.245922

Regina v Manchester Crown Court ex parte Rogers (Legal Professional Privilege): Admn 2 Feb 1999

The police had sought disclosure from the applicant’s solicitors of records of the time at which the applicant arrived at the solicitors’ premises on a particular date and like documents.
Held: Such records are not privileged because they did not relate to legal advice or the subject matter of legal advice. Records of appointments made are not protected, although extracts are not to be made from advice records. A record of an attendance at a solicitor’s office by a client for an appointment, which must involve giving the name of the client, was a communication between client and solicitor, but not one that attracted legal professional privilege.
Lord Bingham LC said: ‘It is in my judgment important to remind oneself of the well established purpose of legal professional privilege, which is to enable a client to make full disclosure to his legal adviser for the purposes of seeking legal advice without apprehension that anything said by him in seeking advice or to him in giving it may thereafter be subject to disclosure against his will. It is certainly true that in cases such as Balabel v Air India [1988] Ch 317, the court has discountenanced a narrow or nit-picking approach to documents and has ruled out an approach which takes a record of a communication sentence by sentence and extends the cloak of privilege to one and withholds it from another. It is none the less true that legal professional privilege applies, and applies only, to communications made for the purpose of seeking and receiving legal advice.
In this case we must consider the function and nature of the documents with which we are concerned. The record of time on an attendance note, on a time sheet or fee record is not in my judgment in any sense a communication. It records nothing which passes between the solicitor and the client and it has nothing to do with obtaining legal advice. It is the same sort of record as might arise if a call were made on a dentist or a bank manager. A record of an appointment made does involve a communication between the client and the solicitor’s office but is not in my judgment, without more, to be regarded as made in connection with legal advice. So to hold would extend the scope of legal privilege far beyond its proper sphere, in my view . . ‘

Judges:

Lord Bingham CJ

Citations:

Times 15-Feb-1999, Gazette 10-Mar-1999, [1999] EWHC Admin 94, [1999] 1 WLR 832

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Leave granted – Regina v Manchester Crown Court ex parte Rogers Admn 6-Nov-1998
Application for leave to apply for judicial review granted. . .

Cited by:

Full review – Regina v Manchester Crown Court ex parte Rogers Admn 6-Nov-1998
Application for leave to apply for judicial review granted. . .
Cited – Regina (Howe) v South Durham Magistrates Court QBD 13-Feb-2004
The defendant was convicted of driving whilst disqualified. He had put the prosecution to proof of the fact that it was he who had been prosecuted. The prosecution called his solicitor to give evidence that it was his client who had been banned on . .
Cited – Miller Gardner Solicitors, Regina (on the Application of) v Minshull Street Crown Court Admn 20-Dec-2002
Police investigating crime obtained a warrant to search a solicitor’s offices for details of their clients. The solicitors appealed.
Held: The details required, namely dates of contacts with a certain telephone number were not legally . .
Cited – Curtis v Curtis CA 8-Mar-2001
The mother sought leave to call in evidence in proceedings for contact, an affidavit sworn by the father’s previous solicitors when applying to be removed from the record, which related the contents of telephone calls from the father to their . .
Cited – Regina v Manchester Crown Court, ex parte McCann and others QBD 22-Nov-2000
An application for an anti-social behaviour order against an individual was a civil, not a criminal proceeding. The standard of evidence required was on the balance of probability; the civil standard. Such proceedings were not subject to the . .
Cited – SRJ v Person(s) Unknown (Author and Commenters of Internet Blogs) QBD 10-Jul-2014
The claimant sought an order for the disclosure by his solicitor of the identity of the author of an internet blog publishing critical material which, the claimant said, was its confidential information. The defendant’s solicitor had failed to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Professions, Crime

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.139358

Regina v Manchester Crown Court ex parte Rogers: Admn 6 Nov 1998

Application for leave to apply for judicial review granted.

Citations:

[1998] EWHC Admin 1051

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Full review – Regina v Manchester Crown Court ex parte Rogers (Legal Professional Privilege) Admn 2-Feb-1999
The police had sought disclosure from the applicant’s solicitors of records of the time at which the applicant arrived at the solicitors’ premises on a particular date and like documents.
Held: Such records are not privileged because they did . .

Cited by:

Leave granted – Regina v Manchester Crown Court ex parte Rogers (Legal Professional Privilege) Admn 2-Feb-1999
The police had sought disclosure from the applicant’s solicitors of records of the time at which the applicant arrived at the solicitors’ premises on a particular date and like documents.
Held: Such records are not privileged because they did . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 27 May 2022; Ref: scu.139172

Director of Public Prosecutions v Ellis: Admn 2 Nov 1998

Citations:

[1998] EWHC Admin 1025

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Taylor v Rajan 2-Jan-1974
The defendant had consumed alcohol so that the alcohol level was 102 milligrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood. An appeal was heard as to whether there existed special reasons for not disqualifying him.
Held: The court considered . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Road Traffic

Updated: 27 May 2022; Ref: scu.139146

Regina v Crown Court At Cambridge, ex parte Rld Buckland: Admn 13 Jul 1998

There is in law no right to appeal to the Crown Court against a Chief Constable’s refusal to amend the conditions attached to a firearms certificate. The system of applying such conditions was a discrete and separate system. His only remedy was in judicial review.

Citations:

Times 17-Sep-1998, Gazette 26-Aug-1998, [1998] EWHC Admin 742

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Firearms Act 1968 29 44

Crime, Administrative, Judicial Review

Updated: 27 May 2022; Ref: scu.138863

Nelder and Others v Crown Prosecution Service: Admn 3 Jun 1998

Hunt saboteurs set out to disrupt a hunt, and were accused of offences of aggravated trespass under the 1994 Act. They defended saying that they had been prevening unlawful activities. They brought evidence that at the outset of the hunt, two whippers-in had strayed from the land over which the hunt had permission to ride and had taken the hounds onto adjacent land where they had no such permission. The trespassing defendants had actively disrupted the actions of all the hunt, not confined to the strayers, and had continued to do so after the latter had rejoined the main body of hunters.
Held: At issue were the concluding words of section 68(2), trespassing occupants rather than occupants committing a criminal offence. The fact that some few members of the hunt had acted unlawfully by trespassing on adjoining land did not affect the lawfulness of the activity which the defendants had disrupted.
Simon Brown LJ offered the suggestion that it might have been otherwise if either the hunt’s ‘central objective’ had been to hunt over land where it had no authority to be, or the defendants had confined their disruption to activity by the strayers.

Judges:

Simon Brown LJ

Citations:

Times 11-Jun-1998, [1998] EWHC Admin 602

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 68

Cited by:

Cited – Richardson and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions SC 5-Feb-2014
The defendants had protested against the activities of a shop, by trespassing. They were said to have committed the offence of aggravated trespass under section 68 of the 1994 Act. They objected in part that this infringed their article 10 right of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 27 May 2022; Ref: scu.138723