Category: Crime

Antoine v Regina: CACD 15 Oct 2014

The Court was asked whether a prosecution should have been stayed as an abuse of the process of the court where the defendant had already been convicted and sentenced for lesser offences arising out of the same facts. The defendant was found with a loaded hand gun. When remanded, he was overheard saying that he was ‘fucked’ and was looking at a sentence of 10 years as ‘I got caught with a loaded hand gun’. The charging advice and decision of the Crown Prosecution Service referred to this being a loaded hand gun, ready to be fired; that the defendant was ‘facing a lengthy sentence’; and that the defendant was a danger and involved in gang violence. Disposal in the Crown Court was in terms contemplated.
By error, the charge was under s 1 (1) (a) of the Firearms Act 1968, possession of a firearm without a licence. When the matter was first before the Magistrates’ Court, it was dealt with by a paralegal for the prosecution. No request for the matter to be sent to the Crown Court was made. The defendant pleaded guilty on that day and was sentenced, also on that day, to 4 months’ imprisonment. The blunder was noted almost immediately and a request to the Magistrates to reopen the matter was made the following day. Following refusal, the defendant was charged with further firearms offences. The Crown Court judge refused an application for a stay, saying that there were special circumstances; whereupon the defendant pleaded guilty.
The Court upheld that ruling; the CPS mistakes had resulted in the defendant ‘being charged with the wrong offences and [being] dealt with in the wrong court’. It was observed that no-one with responsibility for the case correctly applied their minds to the appropriate charges: and the second set of proceedings involved a ‘move from misconceived charges to correct charges’. On the facts of the case, the decisions in Beedie and Dwyer were to be distinguished.

Davis LJ, Thirlwall DBE, Andrews DBE JJ
[2014] EWCA Crim 1971
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Beedie CACD 11-Mar-1997
Stay for Extended Autrefois Convict
The plea of autrefois convict applies only if the legal substance of the charges is same but the judge has a discretion. The plea is not limited to Connelly v DPP definitions, but is still narrow.
A 19-year-old girl died of carbon monoxide . .

Cited by:
Cited – Wangige, Regina v CACD 14-Oct-2020
Second Prosecution on Same Facts was An Abuse
The defendant appealed his conviction of causing death by dangerous driving. He appealed from the refusal of the judge to give a stay the prosecution as an abuse He had been previously prosecuted for a lesser offence on the same facts.
Held: . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 08 January 2022; Ref: scu.537582

Cova Products Ltd, Regina v: CACD 14 Jan 2005

The court considered the practice on an appeal alleging that the jury had returned inconsistent verdicts.
Held: The court approved a statement from Professor Smith: ‘a better view would be that the conviction is not safe unless the court is satisfied that the verdict is not based on the confusion or wrong approach of the jury; and that, once the verdicts are shown to be inconsistent, the burden of persuasion is on the Crown, not the appellant.’

[2005] EWCA Crim 95
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Not approved – Mote v Regina CACD 21-Dec-2007
The defendant appealed his convictions for offences relating to the claiming of benefits, saying that he was immune from prosecution as a member of the European Parliament, and that the verdicts were inconsistent with acquittals on other charges. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 08 January 2022; Ref: scu.249337

Cooke v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 20 Oct 2015

Appeal against conviction for sale of articles of police uniform. The defendant’s assertion that the items had been acquired lawfully succeeded, but the conviction was on the bais that his holding of them for sale made the possession unlawful.

Beatson LJ, Mitting J
[2015] EWHC 3312 (Admin)
Bailii
Police Act 1996
England and Wales

Crime, Police

Updated: 08 January 2022; Ref: scu.557121

Sarwar and Another v Regina: CACD 9 Dec 2015

Appeals against extended sentences of 17 years and 8 months imposed for an offence of preparation of terrorist acts contrary to section 5(1) of the Terrorism Act 2006. The extended sentence comprised a custodial term of 12 years 8 months and an extension period of 5 years. In addition, the appellants were made subject to notification orders under the Counter Terrorism Act 2008 for a period of 30 years.

Treacy LJ, Laing DBE J, Sir David Maddison
[2015] EWCA Crim 1886
Bailii
Terrorism Act 2006, Counter Terrorism Act 2008
England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 08 January 2022; Ref: scu.556765

McCook, Regina v: CACD 10 Apr 2014

Reference by the Registrar under section 20 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968 in respect of an application for leave to appeal which the Registrar has referred to us on the basis that we should consider the case to see if we should summarily dismiss it as an appeal which is frivolous or vexatious and can be decided without a full hearing.

Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd LCJ Sir Brian Leveson P QBD, Lady Justice Hallett VP CACD
[2014] EWCA Crim 734, [2016] 2 Cr App R 301
Bailii
England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 07 January 2022; Ref: scu.525090

Taylor, Regina v: SC 3 Feb 2016

No Liability Extension on Taking Without Consent

Appeal by leave of the Court of Appeal on a point of law arising in the course of the trial of the appellant for aggravated vehicle taking, contrary to section 12A of the Theft Act 1968. The defendant had taken a vehicle without the owner’s consent, was over the blood alcohol limit and was uninsured. He was involved in an accident where the other party died. It was accepted however that he had not been at fault as regards the accident.
Held: The defendant’s appeal was allowed. The Court was unable and disinclined to depart from Hughes: ‘The Crown’s argument effectively invites the court to treat the section as imposing strict liability for the aggravating factors which differentiate this offence from the basic offence under section 12, in circumstances where that course is neither necessary nor warranted by the language of the Act.’
Lord Sumption said: ‘it is one thing for the legislature to make a person who has taken a car without authority responsible for the fault of another person who drives it in his presence. It is another thing altogether to make him responsible for personal injury or damage which could not have been prevented, because it occurred without fault or was entirely the fault of the victim. That would be a sufficiently remarkable extension of the scope of the strict liability to require clear language, such as the draftsman has actually employed to impose liability on a taker who is not the driver. There is no such language in section 12A.’

Lord Neuberger, President, Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Mance, Lord Sumption, Lord Carnwath, Lord Hughes, Lord Toulson
[2016] UKSC 5, [2016] Crim LR 366, [2016] 4 All ER 617, [2016] 1 WLR 50, [2016] WLR(D) 53, [2016] RTR 28, UKSC 2014/0157
Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD, SC, SC Summary
Theft Act 1968 12A
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Taylor, Regina v CACD 9-Apr-2014
. .
Cited – Hughes, Regina v SC 31-Jul-2013
Uninsured Driver Not Guilty of Causing Death
The appellant though an uninsured driver, was driving without fault when another vehicle veered across the road. The other driver died from his injuries, and the appellant convicted of causing his death whilst uninsured. At trial he succeeded in . .
Cited – Regina v Marsh CACD 19-Jul-1996
Damage caused after the taking of a car need not be at the fault of the driver defendant for the offence of aggravated vehicle taking to have been committed by him. The sole requirement of the subsection was that the driving of the vehicle should . .
Cited – Williams, Regina v CACD 2-Nov-2010
The offence of causing death by driving while unlicensed, disqualified or uninsured, is committed if the driver is unlicensed, disqualified or uninsured and if the driving is a cause of death in the sense that it was ‘more than negligible or de . .
Cited – Fowler v Padget 8-Feb-1798
Mens Rea essential to crime
In order to constitute an act of bankruptcy by a trader in departing from his dwelling-house, it is not alone sufficient that a creditor should be thereby delayed, but the departure must also have been with that intent. The word ‘or’ in the statute . .
Cited – Regina v Tolson CCR 11-May-1889
Honest and Reasonable mistake – No Bigamy
The defendant appealed against her conviction for bigamy, saying that she had acted in a mistaken belief.
Held: A man commits bigamy if he goes through a marriage ceremony while his wife is alive, even though he honestly and reasonably . .
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 by:
Cited – Lane and Another, Regina v SC 11-Jul-2018
The defendants were to be tried for allegedly sending funds abroad to support terrorism. The court now considered the meaning of the phrase ‘reasonable cause to suspect’ in the context of the anticipated use of the funds: ‘Does it mean that the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 07 January 2022; Ref: scu.559505

British Telecommunications Plc v Nottinghamshire County Council: Admn 21 Oct 1998

The court considered an appeal by case stated against a conviction on 2 informations under sections 71(1) and (5). One alleged a failure to comply with the prescribed requirements as to the specification of materials to be used in reinstating the street. The other alleged a failure to comply with the prescribed requirements as to the standards of workmanship to be observed in reinstating the street.

[1999] Crim LR 217, [1998] EG 147, [1998] EWHC Admin 989
Bailii
New Roads and Street Works Act 1991 71(1) 71(5)
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Hertfordshire County Council v National Grid Gas Plc Admn 2-Nov-2007
The council laid complaints against the defenedant that it had not properly re-instated road surfaces after completing works. It now appealed, by way of case stated, against the court’s acceptance of the defendant’s argument that the large number of . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Utilities

Updated: 07 January 2022; Ref: scu.139110

James v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 13 Nov 2015

The appellant challenged her conviction for failing to comply with conditions imposed on a public demonstration. Her demonstration outside the Royal Courts of Justice had brought traffic to a standstill. At trial she had been refused permission to raise a fresh issue at trial, namely the proportionality of the condition.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. It would be improper for defendants, under the guise of an abuse of process application made to the Magistrates’ Court, to advance arguments which are in truth simply directed at considerations of the proportionality of the decision to prosecute. Applications for a stay on the grounds of abuse of process are to be circumscribed and orders of stay are, when made, granted only exceptionally.

David LJ, Ouseley J
[2015] EWHC 3296 (Admin)
Bailii
Public Order Act 1986 14
Citing:
Cited – Norwood v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 3-Jul-2003
The appellant a BNP member had displayed a large poster in his bedroom window saying ‘Islam out of Britain’. He was convicted of an aggravated attempt to cause alarm or distress. The offence was established on proof of several matters, unless the . .
Cited – Dehal v Crown Prosecution Service Admn 27-Sep-2005
The appellant had been convicted under section 4 of the 1986 Act. He had been accused of attending at Luton Guruwarda and intending to cause distress. He said that he had gone only peacefully to express his true religious beliefs. He had left a . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions, Regina (on the Application of) v Chorley Justices and Forrest Admn 8-Jun-2006
The prosecutor applied for an order to require the magistrates to state a case. He faced a charge of driving with excess alcohol. He pleaded not guilty. There were several adjournments, and a considerable delay. At the trial, and with no . .
Cited – Malcolm v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 27-Feb-2007
The defendant appealed against her conviction for driving with excess alcohol. The justices had retired and began to announce their decision on one point of law. Defence counsel then raised another matter in closing, and the magistrates allowed the . .
Cited – Bauer and Others v The Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 22-Mar-2013
The appellants had entered Fortnum and Masons to demonstrate against tax avoidance. They appealed against convitions for aggravated trespass.
Held: The statutory question posed by s.68 is whether the prosecution can prove that the trespasser . .
Cited – Abdul and Others v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 16-Feb-2011
The defendants appealed against convictions for using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour or disorderly behaviour . . within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress. He had attended a . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 06 January 2022; Ref: scu.554641

Bani v The Crown: CACD 21 Dec 2021

Each of the four appellants is alleged to have steered a Rigid Hulled Inflatable Boat (‘RHIB’) from France towards the United Kingdom, which was carrying migrants. There is no connection between them apart from the fact that they were all dealt with at the Canterbury Crown Court charged with an offence under the same provision. All on board each of the four RHIBs were seeking to arrive in the United Kingdom without having been given prior leave to do so. None of those in the vessels was a citizen of a member state of the European Union. Each appellant was convicted of an offence contrary to section 25 of the Immigration Act 1971

Lord Justice Edis,
Mrs Justice May,
And,
Sir Nicholas Blake
[2021] EWCA Crim 1958
Bailii, Judiciary
England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 06 January 2022; Ref: scu.670719

John Earl of Sutherland, and Captain David Ross, of Daan, Tenant of The Lands of Skelbo v Mr Archibald Dunbar, and Sir Thomas Calder, and Others, Creditors On The Estate of Skelbo: HL 19 Apr 1725

Temporary Jurisdiction in the Commissioners of Forfeitures – Claims upon the estate of an attainted person, which had reverted to a loyal superior, did not fall under this jurisdiction, but remained to the Ordinary Courts.
Process. – Adjudication. – Mails and Duties – In an action of Mails and Duties brought by an adjudger, the superior to whom the estate hid reverted makes various objections to the adjudications, as already paid, and as in regular; upon the adjudger finding caution to repeat over-payments, these objections are repelled, leaving to the superior his remedy by declarator.
Sequostration – An estate of a person attainted, which had reverted to a loyal superior, is sequestrated at the instance of competing creditors, adjudgers prior to the forfeiture.

[1725] UKHL Robertson – 531, (1725) Robertson 531
Bailii
Scotland

Crime

Updated: 05 January 2022; Ref: scu.554119

Neal, Regina v: CACD 22 Feb 2011

Appeal from conviction of possession of indecent photographs of a child. Material on one count had been shown to the jury even though the judge had directed an acquittal on that charge.
Held: The material was prejudicial and the jury should not have seen it. The appeal succeeded. Since it was doubtful whether there would have been a prosecution at all without that same material, a retrial was not ordered.

[2011] EWCA Crim 461
Bailii
Criminal Justice Act 1988 160(1)
England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 05 January 2022; Ref: scu.431255

Regina v Sharpe: CCCR 1857

The defendant was charged not with theft of a corpse, but of its removal from a grave: ‘Our law recognises no property in a corpse, and the protection of the grave at common law as contradistinguished from ecclesiastic protection to consecrated ground depends on this form of indictment.’

Erle J
[1857] Dears and B 160
Commonlii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Kelly 1999
Robbers who stole and sold preserved specimens from the Royal College of Surgeons’ collection were held rightly convicted of theft. The court considered the issue of ownership of a corpse: ‘We accept that however questionable the historical origins . .
Cited – AB and others v Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust, Cardiff and Vale NHS Trust QBD 26-Mar-2004
Representative claims were made against the respondents, hospitals, pathologists etc with regard to the removal of organs from deceased children without the informed consent of the parents. They claimed under the tort of wrongful interference.
Crime

Updated: 05 January 2022; Ref: scu.195006

Regina v Sharpe: 1987

A member of a gang of robbers sought to establish a defence of duress. The trial judge had directed the jury ‘but in my judgment the defence of duress is not available to an accused who voluntarily exposes and submits himself to illegal compulsion . . it is not merely a matter of joining in a criminal enterprise; it is a matter of joining in a criminal enterprise of such a nature that the defendant appreciated the nature of the enterprise itself and the attitudes of those in charge of it, so that when he was in fact subjected to compulsion he could fairly be said by a jury to have voluntarily exposed himself and submitted himself to such compulsion.’
Lord Lane CJ said ‘where a person has voluntarily and with knowledge of its nature, joined a criminal organization or gang which he knew might bring pressure on him to commit an offence and was an active member when he was put under such pressure, he cannot avail himself of the defence of duress.’

Lord Lane CJ
[1987] QB 583
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – The Coca-Cola Company and Another v Cengiz Aytacli and others ChD 30-Jan-2003
The claimant having succeeded in an action against the defendants, now sought an order for their committal for contempt, accusing them of having given false evidence, and of having failed to comply with court orders made. The defendant asserted a . .
Approved – Regina v Shepherd CACD 2-Jan-1987
The court considered the direction to be given on a defence of duress: ‘ . . .. where a person has voluntarily, and with knowledge of its nature, joined a criminal organisation or gang which he knew might bring pressure on him to commit an offence . .
Cited – Hasan, Regina v HL 17-Mar-2005
The House was asked two questions: the meaning of ‘confession’ for the purposes of section 76(1) of the 1984 Act, and as to the defence of duress. The defendant had been involved in burglary, being told his family would be harmed if he refused. The . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 05 January 2022; Ref: scu.181186

Bernard Fernandes (Prosecutions): ICO 26 Feb 2015

A former support clerk working for Transport for London has been prosecuted at Westminster Magistrates Court for unlawfully accessing the oyster card records of five individuals who were family members and neighbours. Bernard Fernandes was fined andpound;240, ordered to pay a victims surcharge of andpound;20 and andpound;618 prosecution costs.

[2015] UKICO 2015-18
Bailii
England and Wales

Information, Crime

Updated: 05 January 2022; Ref: scu.553741

John Paterson, Eldest Son and Executor of John Archbishop of Glasgow, Deceased v The Commissioners and Trustees of The Forfeited Estates: HL 20 Mar 1721

Forfeiture for Treason. – I Geo. I. c. 20. – Personal debt claimed on a forfeited Estate. –
The acts relative to forfeiture for treason having solved the rights of creditors innocent, dutiful, and loyal; a claim on a forfeited estate, by virtue of a personal bond, (which had been given up in the inventory by the claimant when confirmed to his fathers) is made by a person who had been confined in prison upon suspicion, but liberated without trial; this claim is rejected by the trustees and Court of Delegates, but their judgment is reversed.

[1721] UKHL Robertson – 349
Bailii
Scotland

Crime

Updated: 05 January 2022; Ref: scu.553667

Skerdjan Celaj: ECJ 1 Oct 2015

ECJ Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Area of freedom, security and justice – Directive 2008/115/EC – Return of illegally staying third-country nationals – Return decision accompanied by an entry ban of three years’ duration – Breach of an entry ban – Third-country national previously removed – Sentence of imprisonment in case of new unlawful entry into the national territory – Compatibility

L. Bay Larsen (Rapporteur), P
ECLI:EU:C:2015:640, C-290/14, [2015] EUECJ C-290/14
Bailii
Directive 2008/115/EC

European, Immigration, Crime

Updated: 04 January 2022; Ref: scu.552872

Mayende and Others, Regina v: CACD 25 Sep 2015

Several soldiers appealed against assorted serious offences committed in Germany. They now appealed against conviction and sentence. They complained of failures in the disclosure as to failings in the police investigation process.
Held: The appeals failed. There had been failings by the police investigating the matter, particularly as to the recording of their investigations, however the accusations were insufficiently particular to identify any failing so serious as to undermine the overall validity of the process.

Fulford LJ, Flaux, Thirlwall JJ
[2015] EWCA Crim 1566
Bailii
Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 (Code of Practice) (Armed Forces) Order 2009
England and Wales

Crime, Armed Forces

Updated: 04 January 2022; Ref: scu.552732

Nicklinson and Lamb v The United Kingdom: ECHR 23 Jun 2015

ECHR Article 8-1
Respect for private life
Ban on assisted suicide and voluntary euthanasia: inadmissible
Facts – The first applicant is the wife of Tony Nicklinson, now deceased, who suffered locked-in syndrome following a stroke. The second applicant was paralysed following a car accident. His condition is irreversible. Both men wish/ed to end their lives but are/were unable to commit suicide without assistance. They unsuccessfully challenged the statutory ban on assisted suicide and the law on murder, which did not recognise voluntary euthanasia as a defence, before the domestic courts. The Supreme Court found, in particular, that such a sensitive issue was for Parliament to resolve.
Law – Article 8
(a) First applicant: In order for the right to respect for private life to be properly secured at domestic level, individuals had to be able to seek to rely on arguments derived from Article 8 in domestic proceedings and to have those arguments considered and, where appropriate, taken into account in the rulings of the domestic courts. The Court’s more recent case-law had often tended to view this ancillary aspect of private-life protection as arising under the so-called procedural aspect of Article 8 itself (see, for example, Koch v. Germany, 497/09, 19 July 2012, Information Note 154; and McCann v. the United Kingdom, 19009/04, 13 May 2008, Information Note 108).
It was well established in the Court’s case-law that Article 13 does not go so far as to guarantee a remedy allowing primary legislation to be challenged before a national authority on the ground of being contrary to the Convention. Where, as here, the case concerned a challenge to primary legislation, rather than, as in Koch and McCann, an individual measure of implementation, it would therefore be anomalous if the procedural aspect of Article 8 extended further than Article 13 so as to require the possibility of challenging primary legislation in cases giving rise to private-life concerns.
However, the Convention was part of the domestic law of the United Kingdom and a procedure existed, under the Human Rights Act, permitting primary legislation to be challenged on the basis of its alleged incompatibility with Article 8. It could therefore be argued that where the State had chosen to provide a remedy in respect of primary legislation, such remedy was subject to the procedural requirements which generally arose under Article 8, and in particular to the requirement set out in Koch as to the need for an examination of the merits of the claim. For the Court, however, there was a fundamental problem with extending the procedural protections of Article 8 in that way. The problem arose from the application of the margin of appreciation available to member States in cases concerning challenges to primary legislation under Article 8. The Contracting States were generally free to determine which of the three branches of government should be responsible for taking policy and legislative decisions which fell within their margin of appreciation and it was not for the European Court to involve itself in their internal constitutional arrangements. However, when it concluded in any given case that an impugned legislative provision fell within the margin of appreciation, it would often be the case that the Court was, essentially, referring to Parliament’s discretion to legislate as it saw fit in that particular area. Thus, in Pretty v. the United Kingdom (2346/02, 29 April 2002) the Court had held that it was for States to assess the risk and likely incidence of abuse if the general prohibition on assisted suicide were to be relaxed or exceptions created. In the context of the United Kingdom, that assessment had been made by Parliament in enacting the relevant provision of the 1961 Suicide Act, a provision that had been reconsidered several times by Parliament in recent years, having been re-enacted in 2009. If the domestic courts were to be required to give a judgment on the merits of such a complaint this could have the effect of forcing upon them an institutional role not envisaged by the domestic constitutional order. Further, it would be odd to deny domestic courts charged with examining the compatibility of primary legislation with the Convention the possibility of concluding, like the Court, that Parliament was best placed to take a decision on the issue in question in light of the sensitive issues, notably ethical, philosophical and social, which arose. For those reasons, the Court did not consider it appropriate to extend Article 8 so as to impose on the Contracting States a procedural obligation to make available a remedy requiring the courts to decide on the merits of a claim such as the one made in the instant case.
In any event, the majority of the Supreme Court judges had dealt with the substance of the first applicant’s claim. They had concluded that she had failed to show that developments since Pretty meant that the ban could no longer be considered a proportionate interference with Article 8 rights. The fact that in making their assessment they had attached great significance to the views of Parliament did not mean that they had failed to carry out any balancing exercise. Rather, they had chosen – as they were entitled to do in light of the sensitive issue at stake and the absence of any consensus among Contracting States – to conclude that the views of Parliament weighed heavily in the balance.
Conclusion: inadmissible (manifestly ill-founded).
(b) Second applicant: Before the Court of Appeal, challenges had been made to both the prohibition on assisted suicide and the law on murder, which made no exception for voluntary euthanasia. However, before the Supreme Court the second applicant had only pursued his complaint about the ban on assisted suicide and not his argument that there should be a judicial procedure to authorise voluntary euthanasia in certain circumstances. It could not be assumed that the Supreme Court would have disposed of the argument concerning voluntary euthanasia in the same way as it disposed of the claim in respect of the prohibition of assisted suicide.
Conclusion: inadmissible (failure to exhaust domestic remedies).

2478/15; 1787/15 – Legal Summary, [2015] ECHR 783
Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights 8-1
Human Rights
Citing:
At HL – Nicklinson and Another, Regina (on The Application of) SC 25-Jun-2014
Criminality of Assisting Suicide not Infringing
The court was asked: ‘whether the present state of the law of England and Wales relating to assisting suicide infringes the European Convention on Human Rights, and whether the code published by the Director of Public Prosecutions relating to . .

Cited by:
See Also – Nicklinson and Lamb v United Kingdom ECHR 16-Jul-2015
The applicants, suffering life threatening and severely disabling conditions, complained of laws which would allow the criminal prosecutions of those assisting them to end their lives. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Health, Crime

Updated: 04 January 2022; Ref: scu.552391

The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission and Dr Jim Swire and Rev John F Mosey: HCJ 12 Aug 2015

Application for the review of the conviction of (the now deceased) Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi, who was convicted on 31 January 2001 of the murder of 259 passengers and crew on board PanAm flight PA 103 from London to New York, and 11 residents of Lockerbie on 21 December 1988.

Lord Justice Clerk, Lord Brodie, Lady Dorrian
[2015] ScotHC HCJAC – 76, 2015 SCL 884, 2015 SLT 556, 2015 GWD 26-459, 2015 SCCR 333
Bailii
Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 194D(3)

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 04 January 2022; Ref: scu.552299