Category: Crime

Mateta and Others, Regina v: CACD 30 Jul 2013

Each appellant had been convicted upon their admission on legal advice of attempting to rely upon a false travel document to secure entry to the UK as a refugee. In each case a defence may have been available under section 31 of the 19 Act.

Leveson, Fulford LJJ, Spencer J
[2013] EWCA Crim 1372, [2013] 2 Cr App R 35, [2014] Crim LR 227, [2014] 1 All ER 152, [2014] 1 WLR 1516
Bailii
Identity Cards Act 2006 25(1), Identity Documents Act 2010 4, Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 31
England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 21 November 2021; Ref: scu.516013

Jogee, Regina v: CACD 11 Jul 2013

The appellant (Jogee) had been convicted of murder, having been present at a murder and having been found to have anticipated and encouraged violence. He appealed against his conviction under the rules of joint enterprise.

Laws LJ, Irwin, Griffith Williams JJ
[2013] EWCA Crim 1433
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – Jogee and Ruddock (Jamaica) v The Queen SC 18-Feb-2016
Joint Enterprise Murder
The two defendants appealed against their convictions (one in Jamaica) for murder, under the law of joint enterprise. Each had been an accessory when their accomplice killed a victim with a knife. The judge in Jogee had directed the jury that he . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 21 November 2021; Ref: scu.516011

BX v Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 4 May 2010

The applicant was subject to a non-derogating control order. The court was asked (1) whether a ‘controlled person’ to whom the Secretary of State has given notice of modification under section 7(2)(d) and (8)(c) 2005 Act, may seek to challenge or reverse its implementation in an interlocutory application for an injunction, either in the course of judicial review proceedings or in the course of an appeal against the modification under section 10 of the Act; and (2) whether, and if so to what extent, the procedural safeguards of Article 6 ECHR apply to judicial consideration of the interlocutory application.

Lord Neuberger MR, Maurice Kay LJ, Pitchford LJ
[2010] EWCA Civ 481, [2010] UKHRR 766, [2010] 1 WLR 2463
Bailii
Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 7
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Bank Mellat v HM Treasury QBD 11-Jun-2010
The respondent had made an order under the Regulations restricting all persons from dealing with the the claimant bank. The bank applied to have the order set aside. Though the defendant originally believed that the Iranian government owned 80% of . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 20 November 2021; Ref: scu.409219

Bullen and Soneji v The United Kingdom: ECHR 8 Jan 2009

The claimants said that the confiscation and money-laundering proceedings taken against them had taken too long, with delays of 43 months out of a total of 66 month case attributable to the state.
Held: The delay was too long. The applicants faced issues of the payment of substantial sums with imprisonment by default of payment.

L Garlicki, President, and Judges Sir Nicolas Bratza, G.Bonnelo, L. Mijovic, J.Sikuta, M. Poalelungi and N. Vucinic
[2009] ECHR 28, [2009] Lloyd’s Rep FC 210
Bailii, Times
European Convention on Human Rights 6
Human Rights
Citing:
See Also – Bullen And Soneji v The United Kingdom ECHR 15-Jun-2007
. .
At Court of Appeal – Regina v Soneji; Regina v Bullen CACD 20-Jun-2003
If the court could only postpone confiscation proceedings in exceptional circumstances, it behoved the court before allowing such an adjournment to enquire into the justification, and to record the circumstances which made it exceptional. The . .
Cited – Crowther v The United Kingdom ECHR 1-Feb-2005
The applicant complained of the delay by the Customs and Excise in enforcing a confiscation order against him of four years.
Held: The respondent had allowed almost four years to pass after the liability had been incurred without taking any . .
At House of Lords – Regina v Soneji and Bullen HL 21-Jul-2005
The defendants had had confiscation orders made against them. They had appealed on the basis that the orders were made more than six months after sentence. The prosecutor now appealed saying that the fact that the order were not timely did not . .
Cited – Howarth v The United Kingdom ECHR 21-Sep-2000
The defendant had been sentenced to a non-custodial sentence, but the crown appealed, and two years later, a custodial sentence was substituted.
Held: The delay was a breach of the Convention’s reasonable time requirement under article 6 of . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Crime

Updated: 20 November 2021; Ref: scu.332848

Ginwalla, Regina v: CACD 8 Dec 2005

[2005] EWCA Crim 3553
Bailii
Drug Trafficking Act 1994 31(4)
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Gibson v Revenue and Customs Prosecution Office CA 12-Jun-2008
The claimant’s husband had been made subject to a criminal confiscation order in the sum of pounds 5.5 million. She now sought to appeal an action against life policies in which she claimed a 50% interest.
Held: Despite the finding that she . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 20 November 2021; Ref: scu.278598

Gibson v Revenue and Customs Prosecution Office: CA 12 Jun 2008

The claimant’s husband had been made subject to a criminal confiscation order in the sum of pounds 5.5 million. She now sought to appeal an action against life policies in which she claimed a 50% interest.
Held: Despite the finding that she had some awareness of her husband’s activities, the claimant was entitled to keep her assets. The claimant’s interest in the property was established before any agreement to discharge the mortgage from criminal proceeds.

May LJ, Arden LJ, Wall LJ
[2008] EWCA Civ 645, Times 11-Jul-2008, [2008] NPC 63, [2009] QB 348, [2008] Lloyd’s Rep FC 509, [2008] 2 FLR 1672, [2008] WTLR 1605, [2008] Fam Law 847, [2009] 2 WLR 471
Bailii
Drug Trafficking Act 1994 31(4)
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Buckman CACD 3-Oct-1996
When considering a confiscation order which would affect the wife of the accused, and where property is held in joint names, the court should start with the prima facie position as to where the beneficial interests lay and then go on to find whether . .
Cited – In re Norris, Application by Norris HL 28-Jun-2001
The applicant’s husband had been made the subject of a drugs confiscation order. Part of this was an order against the house. She had failed in asserting that the house was hers. Her appeal to a civil court had been disallowed as an abuse. It was . .
Cited – Commissioners of Customs and Excise v A: A v A CA 22-Jul-2002
The Customs appealed an order allowing a judge in divorce ancillary relief proceedings to make an order transferring the matrimonial home and two life policies in such a way as would defeat their attempt to enforce recovery under the 1994 Act.
Cited – Ginwalla, Regina v CACD 8-Dec-2005
. .
Cited – Stack v Dowden HL 25-Apr-2007
The parties had cohabited for a long time, in a home bought by Ms Dowden. After the breakdown of the relationship, Mr Stack claimed an equal interest in the second family home, which they had bought in joint names. The House was asked whether, when . .
Cited – Crown Prosecution Service v Richards and Richards CA 27-Jun-2006
The court was asked how to resolve the conflict between a public policy imperative to deprive offenders of the fruits of their crime and the requirement that dependants are provided for after divorce when the only funds available for both are the . .
Cited – Tinsley v Milligan HL 28-Jun-1993
Two women parties used funds generated by a joint business venture to buy a house in which they lived together. It was vested in the sole name of the plaintiff but on the understanding that they were joint beneficial owners. The purpose of the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 20 November 2021; Ref: scu.268828

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).
Held: ‘The rule that this court must always follow a decision of the House of Lords and, indeed, one of its own decisions rather than a decision of the Privy Council is one that was established at a time when no tribunal other than the House of Lords itself could rule that a previous decision of the House of Lords was no longer good law. Once one postulates that there are circumstances in which a decision of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council can take precedence over a decision of the House of Lords, it seems to us that this court must be bound in those circumstances to prefer the decision of the Privy Council to the prior decision of the House of Lords. That, so it seems to us, is the position that has been reached in the case of these appeals. ‘ The decision in Holley was convincing, and preferred. The appeals were dismissed.

Lord Phillips CJ, Sir Igor Judge P QBD, Poole, Bean, Dobbs JJ
[2006] EWCA Crim 14, Times 14-Feb-2006, [2006] 2 WLR 887, [2006] QB 588
Bailii
Homicide Act 1957 3
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 – 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 – 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 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 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 – Regina v Parker CACD 25-Feb-1997
The defendant appealed his conviction for murder, saying that his defence of provocation should have been left for the jury.
Held: Not following Luc, it was open to admit relevant evidence on the defendant’s capacity for self-control. Having . .
Cited – Regina v Campbell CACD 25-Oct-1996
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder. At trial he had pleaded provocation, but not that he suffered abnormality of mind. Subsequent evidence of his state of mind led to this referral. The court now received fresh evidence to . .
Cited – Practice Statement (Judicial Precedent) HL 1966
The House gave guidance how it would treat an invitation to depart from a previous decision of the House. Such a course was possible, but the direction was not an ‘open sesame’ for a differently constituted committee to prefer their views to those . .
Cited – Anderton v Ryan HL 9-May-1985
The defendant was found in possession of a video recorder. She refused to name the source, but admitted that she believed it to be stolen. After it became clear that there was no evidence that it was in fact stolen, she was convicted of attempting . .
Cited – Regina v Shivpuri HL 15-May-1986
The defendant had been accused of attempting to import controlled drugs, but the substances actually found were not in fact a controlled drug, though he had believed and intended them to be. He appealed saying that he should not be conviced of an . .
Cited – Miliangos v George Frank (Textiles) Ltd HL 1975
The issue was whether an English court was able to award damages in Sterling only.
Held: The House distinguished clearly between the substance of the debtor’s obligations and the effect of English procedural law when a debt in a foreign . .
Cited – Tai Hing Ltd v Liu Chong Hing Bank PC 1985
(Hong Kong) The relationship between banker and customer is principally a contractual one between debtor and creditor. As between the banker and his customer, the risk of loss through forgery of the customer’s signature falls on the banker unless . .
Cited – de Lasala v de Lasala PC 4-Apr-1979
No Revisiting of Capital Claim after Compromise
(Hong Kong) Where capital claims are compromised in a once-for-all court order they cannot be revisited or reissued in the absence of a substantial mistake. Capital orders are ‘once-for-all orders’. The legal effect of the order derives not from the . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd v Morts Dock and Engineering Co Ltd (The Wagon Mound No 1) PC 18-Jan-1961
Foreseeability Standard to Establish Negligence
Complaint was made that oil had been discharged into Sydney Harbour causing damage. The court differentiated damage by fire from other types of physical damage to property for the purposes of liability in tort, saying ‘We have come back to the plain . .
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 – Davis v Johnson HL 2-Jan-1978
The court was asked to interpret the 1976 Act to see whether its protection extended to cohabitees as well as to wives. In doing so it had to look at practice in the Court of Appeal in having to follow precedent.
Held: The operation of the . .
Cited – Simpson v Regina CACD 23-May-2003
The appellant challenged a confiscation order made on his conviction of VAT fraud. It was argued that one could not be made unless a proper notice had been given, and none of the offences occurred before 1995. On the assumption that section 1 of the . .

Cited by:
Cited – Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council v Municipal Mutual Insurance Ltd CA 6-Feb-2006
The deceased had come into contact with asbestos when working on building sites for more than one contractor. The claimant here sought contribution from the defendants for the damages it had paid to his estate. The issue was as to liability on . .
Cited – Willers v Gubay ChD 15-May-2015
The court was asked whether the tort of malicious prosecution of civil proceedings is known to English law.
Held: The Crawfod Adjusters case should not be followed: ‘If I am not bound by Gregory, then I see no reason for departing from the . .
Cited – Willers v Joyce and Another (Re: Gubay (Deceased) No 2) SC 20-Jul-2016
The Court was asked whether and in what circumstances a lower court may follow a decision of the Privy Council which has reached a different conclusion from that of the House of Lords (or the Supreme Court or Court of Appeal) on an earlier occasion. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Constitutional

Updated: 20 November 2021; Ref: scu.237909

Robson and others v Regina: CACD 21 Dec 2006

Appeal from convictions for historic abuse: ‘the appeals raise the difficult question of the safety of verdicts which depend upon evidence given by witnesses who were young at the time, vulnerable and purport to give an account of events which may have taken place at least twenty-five years ago. They raise the issue as to whether, either at the close of the prosecution case, or at the close of the defence case, the judge should have intervened to withdraw the allegations from the jury on the basis that no jury could safely convict. They also raise an issue as to the proper way the judge should have directed the jury about such incidents.’
Held: As to some counts: ‘, in the light of the paucity of clear evidence identifying which teachers were responsible for the attack by the school and the inaccuracy of the judge in identifying which evidence went to Counts 7 to 9, the verdicts of guilty in relation to George Robson and Wilson are unsafe and should be quashed. It must not be forgotten that the witnesses were purporting to identify teachers as being responsible for this fight, possibly some twenty-six years previously. There was such a lack of clear, reliable and consistent evidence, coupled with a significantly inaccurate direction as to lead us to the conclusion that the verdicts on Counts 7 to 9 are unsafe.’

Moses LJ, McCombe J, Martin Stephens QC HHJ
[2006] EWCA Crim 2754
Bailii
England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 20 November 2021; Ref: scu.247500

Regina v Kempster: CACD 11 Dec 2003

Mantell LJ said that: ‘The judge has a discretion whether or not to grant an adjournment so as to permit fresh counsel to be instructed. The discretion has to be exercised with regard to the interests of justice in the particular case. The interests of the defendant, but also those of the prosecution, the witnesses and the public have to be taken into account. We have had regard to these principles, and to the provisions of Article 6.’

Mr Justice Jackson Lord Justice Mantell The Recorder Of Manchester
[2003] EWCA Crim 3555
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Cadamartriea, Regina v CACD 18-Oct-2019
Appeal from conviction of murder – whether a fair trial after a withdrawal by his counsel at the conclusion of his evidence. Counsel had said they were professionally embarrassed by new instructions.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The judge had . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Human Rights

Updated: 20 November 2021; Ref: scu.188712

Rowe v Regina: CACD 15 Mar 2007

The defendant had been convicted of possessing articles for terrorist purposes, namely a notebook with notes setting out how to construct a mortar bomb in his handwriting. There was also a coded list of potential targets.
Held: The decision in R v M ‘that ‘articles’ within the meaning of section 57 cannot extend to documents and records because express provision is made for these items under article 58′ was unsatisfactory. There was an overlap between sections 57 and 58, but that did not mean that a finding that a document was an article would make section 58 almost superfluous. The two sections dealt with different aspects of terrorism. Section 57 included a specific intention, but section 58 did not.

Lord Phillips CJ, Latham LJ, Cresswell J, Burton J
[2007] EWCA Crim 635, Times 26-Mar-2007
Bailii
Terrorism Act 2000 57(1)
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – M and Others, Regina v CACD 7-Feb-2007
The defendants appealed a ruling by the recorder that electronic storage devices were ‘articles’ within s57. S58 dealt with documents, and section 57 with articles.
Held: Hooper LJ said: ‘There is no practical difference between a book which a . .
Cited – Palmer, Regina v CACD 11-Oct-2002
The defendant appealed against a very substantial confiscation order. The prosecution had served notices under sections 71 and 72(1), but the section 72(1) notice was invalid. The judge allowed a second notice to be served, and the case to be . .
Cited – Sekhon, etc v Regina CACD 16-Dec-2002
The defendants appealed against confiscation orders on the basis that in various ways, the Crown had failed to comply with procedural requirements.
Held: The courts must remember the importance of such procedures in the fight against crime, . .
Cited – Simpson v Regina CACD 23-May-2003
The appellant challenged a confiscation order made on his conviction of VAT fraud. It was argued that one could not be made unless a proper notice had been given, and none of the offences occurred before 1995. On the assumption that section 1 of the . .
Cited – Keogh v Regina CACD 7-Mar-2007
The defendant was charged under the 1989 Act. He complained that the effect of the Act was to put an unfair burden on him to establish that he was unaware of the damaging effects of disclosure.
Held: The Act did not comply with the defendant’s . .

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

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 20 November 2021; Ref: scu.251143

Regina v Collett, Regina v Furminger, Regina v Nazari, Regina v Pope, Regina v Bandar: CACD 28 Oct 1993

The use of land contrary to an enforcement notice is an offence of absolute liability. The burden was on the user of land to establish what uses were lawful.

Times 28-Oct-1993, Gazette 08-Dec-1993
Town and Country Planning Act 1971 89(5)
England and Wales

Crime, Planning

Updated: 20 November 2021; Ref: scu.86408

Regina v Pierre Bouchereau: ECJ 27 Oct 1977

ECJ The different language versions of a community text must be given a uniform interpretation and hence in the case of divergence between the versions the provision in question must be interpreted by reference to the purpose and general scheme of the rules of which it forms a part. Any action affecting the right of persons coming within the field of application of article 48 of the treaty to enter and reside freely in the member states under the same conditions as the nationals of the host state constitutes a ‘measure’ for the purposes of article 3(1) and (2) of directive no 64/221/EEC. That concept includes the action of a court which is required by the law to recommend in certain cases the deportation of a national of another member state , where such recom- mendation constitutes a necessary prerequisite for a decision to make a deportation order. Article 3(2) of directive no 64/221/EEC, according to which previous criminal convictions do not in themselves constitute grounds for the imposition of the restrictions on free movement authorized by article 48 of the treaty on grounds of public policy and public security, must be interpreted to mean that previous criminal convictions are relevant only in so far as the circumstances which gave rise to them are evidence of personal conduct constituting a present threat to the requirements of public policy.
In so far as it may justify certain restrictions on the free movement of persons subject to community law , recourse by a national authority to the concept of public policy presupposes, in any event, the existence, in addition to the perturbation to the social order which any infringement of the law involves, of a genuine and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental interests of society.
‘In so far as it may justify certain restrictions on the free movement of persons subject to Community law, recourse by a national authority to the concept of public policy presupposes, in any event, the existence, in addition to the perturbation of the social order which any infringement of the law involves, of a genuine and sufficiently serious threat to the requirements of public policy affecting one of the fundamental interests of society.’
The ECJ held, in answer to the three questions asked of it, that:
i) a recommendation for deportation was a ‘measure’ within Article 3(1) since it was a pre-condition for the making of a deportation order under section 3(6) of the Immigration Act 1971;
ii) the effect of Article 3(2) was that a previous criminal conviction could be taken into account only if it was evidence of personal conduct constituting a present threat to the requirements of public policy; and
iii) ‘recourse by a national authority to the concept of public policy pre-supposes . . the existence, in addition to the perturbation of the social order which any infringement of the law involves, of a genuine and sufficiently serious threat to the requirements of public policy affecting one of the fundamental interests of society.’

C-30/77, [1977] ECR 1999, R-30/77, [1977] EUECJ R-30/77, [1987] QB 732
Bailii
Directive 64/221/EEC of 25 February 1964 on the co-ordination of special measures concerning the movement and residence of foreign nationals which are justified on grounds of public policy, public security or public health
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Chief Constable of Sussex, ex Parte International Trader’s Ferry Limited HL 2-Apr-1998
Chief Constable has a Wide Discretion on Resources
Protesters sought to prevent the appellant’s lawful trade exporting live animals. The police provided assistance, but then restricted it, pleading lack of resources. The appellants complained that this infringed their freedom of exports under . .
Cited – Regina v Kraus CACD 1982
. .
Cited – Regina v Compassi CACD 1987
The court considered the test in deciding whether to make a recommendation for deportation of a defendant on completion of his jail sentence: ‘So far as this case is concerned this appellant has no previous convictions, and the question which has to . .
Cited – Regina v Kluxen CACD 14-May-2010
The court considered the occasions on which a court should recommend deportation after completion of a prison sentence and how this might differ between EU and non-EU nationals.
Held: Since the 2007 it is not appropriate to recommend . .
Cited – Regina v Escauriaza CACD 2-Jan-1988
For all practical purposes the tests for deportation of an EU national after completion of a sentence of imprisonment are the same in Nazari and Bouchereau: ‘Thus under EEC Law a valid recommendation for deportation can only be made if at least two . .
Cited – Benabbas, Regina v CACD 12-Aug-2005
The Court considered a recommendation for the deportation of an Algerian national after the completion of his sentence.
Held: Rix LJ referred to both the Nazari and the Bouchereau tests, and said: ‘The Appellant is not of course an EU . .
Cited – Regina v Nazari CACD 1980
The CACD heard several appeals together, giving guidance as to the general principles to be applied in deciding on recommendations for deportation under the Act. Lawton LJ said that ‘no court should make an order recommending deportation without . .
Cited – Regina v Spura 3-Jan-1988
The court considered the test for ordering deportation of an EU National after completion of his sentence of imprisonment, applying Bouchereau and Nazari: ‘. . in the case of Escauriaza . . the Court . . concluded, accepting a submission from an . .
Cited – Regina v Cravioto 1990
. .
Cited – B v Secretary of State for Home Department CA 18-May-2000
The claimant had come to England as a child from Italy. As an adult, he was convicted of a sexual assault against his daughter, and after release from his prison sentence of five years, he now appealed against a deportation order, saying that the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, European, Crime, Immigration

Updated: 20 November 2021; Ref: scu.132607

Rex v Rose: 1946

(Quebec Court of King’s Bench, Appeal Side) Rose was convicted on charges of conspiracy to act with a group of Russian and Canadian subjects in a manner which was prejudicial to the safety of Canada. Part of the evidence was contained in documents which had been stolen by a defecting clerk who was employed in the embassy and was handed over to the Canadian police.
Held: Rose’s claim that the stolen documents used against him were immune from use was rejected. The general rule was not absolute: it was subject to exceptions, and it could not be invoked by a Canadian citizen in litigation between his government and himself; nor when the documents revealed an abuse of diplomatic privilege by the foreign state which constituted a threat to the safety of the receiving state; nor in cases where no one connected with the foreign state or its embassy claimed any privilege for the documents. Such a claim ‘could not be admitted where the recognition of such immunity was inconsistent with the fundamental right of self-preservation belonging to a State or where the executive had impliedly refused to recognise such immunity.’
Bissonnette J said: ‘International law creates a presumption of law that documents coming from an embassy have a diplomatic character and that every court of justice must refuse to acknowledge jurisdiction or competence with regard to them.’
However: ‘To sum up, I believe that diplomatic immunity is relative; that the Courts must give effect to it and accord its advantage to every diplomatic agent who claims it; that the privilege of taking advantage of the immunity of a foreign State cannot be admitted for a Canadian citizen in litigation between his Government and himself, when he is not part of a diplomatic corps; to impose, through a judicial decision, immunity upon a State which does not claim any, would be casting a slur upon its dignity, its sovereignty, and, through a gesture as ungracious as unexpected, would elevate a simple suit to a degree of international importance and create, at least in theory, a diplomatic conflict contrary to the will of the executive power itself.’

Bissonnette J
Can Dig 1946 76 161, [1947] 3 DLR 618
Canada
Cited by:
Distinguished – Fayed v Al-Tajir CA 1987
The de facto head of the Embassy of the United Arab Emirates in London was sued by Mr Fayed in respect of an Embassy communication addressed to an Embassy counsellor. Diplomatic immunity had been waived, but the question remained whether the . .
Cited – Bancoult, Regina (on The Application of) (No 3) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs SC 8-Feb-2018
Diplomatic Protection Lost to Public Domain
The claimant challenged the use of a Marine Protected Area Order to exclude the Chagossians from their homelands on their British Indian Overseas Territory. They had sought to have admitted and used in cross examination of witnesses leaked . .
Cited – Bancoult, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs Admn 11-Jun-2013
The claimant, displaced from the Chagos Archipelago, challenged a decision by the respondent to create a no-take Marine Protected Area arround the island which would make life there impossible if he and others returned. The respondent renewed his . .
Cited – Bancoult, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs CA 23-May-2014
The appellant wished to challenge the decision made by the respondent to declare a ‘no-take’ Marine Protected Area’ covering their former home islands of Chagos. They sought to have entered in evidence of an improper motive in the Minister making . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, International

Updated: 20 November 2021; Ref: scu.653202

Regina v Seers: CACD 1984

Assessing Degree of Impairment

The court considered whether the defendant’s depression could amount to an impairment.
Griffiths LJ said: ‘It is to be remembered that in Byrne . . all the doctors agreed that Byrne could be described as partially insane; he was a sexual psychopath who had hideously mutilated a young woman he had killed. In such a case the evidence justifies inviting a jury to determine the degree of impairment of mental responsibility by a test of partial insanity. But it is not a legitimate method of construing an Act of Parliament to substitute for the words of the Act an entirely different phrase and to say that it is to apply in all circumstances. We are sure that this was not the intention of the court in Byrne . . and the phrase was used as one way of assisting the jury to determine the degree of impairment of mental responsibility in an appropriate case, and no doubt to point out that Parliament by the use of the word ‘substantial’ was indicating a serious degree of impairment of mental responsibility.’

Griffiths LJ
(1984) 79 Cr App R 261
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Golds, Regina v SC 30-Nov-2016
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder, saying that he should have been only convicted of manslaughter, applying the new test for diminished responsibility as provided under the 1957 Act as amended, and particularly whether the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 20 November 2021; Ref: scu.631425

Collins, Regina v: CACD 23 Jun 2021

Application for leave to appeal after being of convicted of six offences: two burglaries of dwellings (counts 1 and 5); two aggravated vehicle takings (counts 2 and 6); one attempted robbery (count 3); and manslaughter (as an alternative to murder), count 7.

[2021] EWCA Crim 1074
Bailii
England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 20 November 2021; Ref: scu.668578

Young v McGlennan: 1991

An assault may be committed if an accused has acted deliberately when he has carried out an attack upon another.

1991 SCCR 738
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Young v McGlennan 1990
The court reviewed the authourities on the use of consecutive sentences at common law. . .

Cited by:
Cited – Lord Advocate’s Reference (No 2 of 1992) HCJ 23-Oct-1992
. .
Cited – Gray v The Criminal Injuries Compensation Board OHCS 28-Oct-1998
. .
Cited – Thorne v Procurator Fiscal, Dunfermline HCJ 5-Aug-1999
. .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 19 November 2021; Ref: scu.279967

Dundas-Jones and others v Regina: CACD 26 Jan 2007

Several defendants had been convicted of various offences relating to the importation of substantial volumes of cocaine, and its manufacture into crack cocaine, and money-laundering offences. The first defendant appealed her conviction for having been involved in a conspiracy to courier the drugs. The principle evidence was a call lasting only three minutes in whch she booked a flight. Her defence was that any such call would take at least 10 minutes, and that she had not made such a call.
Held: The judge’s direction to the jury not to speculate risked withholding the defendant’s defence from them, and he might have avoided his sarcasm, but the result came within his range of discretion and may have been generous to her, but was insufficient to dispell his earlier comments which undermined the defence, and the appeal was allowed. Another defendant claimed to have had no knowledge of the conpiracy. A prison escort officer had overheard a conversation in which a leading conspirator had confessed tat he had not told her what was happening. The evidence was reliable, was admitted, and the conviction set aside.

Laws LJ, Penry-Davey J, Recorder of Chester
[2007] EWCA Crim 2
Bailii
England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 19 November 2021; Ref: scu.248244

Fitzmaurice, Regina v: CACD 8 Jul 1982

The defendant appealed against his conviction for inciting others to commit robbery. The men he was said to have incited were not convicted.

O’Connor LJ, Neill, Taylor JJ
[1982] EWCA Crim 1, [1983] 1 All ER 189, [1983] 2 WLR 227, [1983] QB 1083, [1982] Crim LR 677, (1982) 76 Cr App R 17
Bailii
England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 19 November 2021; Ref: scu.247945

Rex v Bembridge: 1783

The defendant was an accountant in the office and place of receiver and paymaster general. The court was asked whether he held a public office.
Held: A man who holds a public office is answerable criminally to the king for misbehaviour in that office, especially if he is paid.
Lord Mansfield said ‘Here there are two principles applicable: first, that a man accepting an office of trust concerning the public, especially if attended with profit, is answerable criminally to the King for misbehaviour in his office; this is true, by whomsoever and in whatsoever way the officer is appointed . . secondly, where there is a breach of trust, fraud or imposition, in a matter concerning the public, though as between individuals it would only be actionable, yet as between the King and the subject it is indictable. That such should be the rule is essential to the existence of the country’.

Lord Mansfield CJ
(1783) 3 Doug K B 32, [1783] EngR 170, (1783) 3 Doug 327, (1783) 99 ER 679 (B)
Commonlii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Llewellyn-Jones CACD 1968
The Registrar of a County Court was convicted of offences of misconduct in public office. The indictment charged ‘misbehaviour in a public office, contrary to common law’ and alleged that court orders had been made ‘with the intention of gaining . .
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 . .
Cited – Regina v Dytham CACD 1979
A constable was 30 yards away from the entrance to a club, from which he saw a man ejected. There was a fight involving cries and screams and the man was beaten and kicked to death in the gutter outside the club. The constable made no move to . .
Cited – Mitchell, Regina v CACD 12-Feb-2014
‘Is a paramedic employed by a National Health Service Trust in its ambulance service the holder of a public office so as to be subject to criminal sanction for misconduct?’
Held: The appeal succeeded; he was not: ‘the nature of the duty . .
Cited – ABC and Others, Regina v CACD 26-Mar-2015
Several defendants sought to appeal against convictions. They were public officials accused of having committed misconduct in public office in the sale of information relating to their work to journalists. The journalists were convicted of . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 19 November 2021; Ref: scu.196545

Lynch v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 8 Nov 2001

The defendant challenged a conviction for having a locked bladed article in his possession in a public place, on the basis that it placed on him a burden of proof contrary to the convention.
Held: Salabiaku permits a reverse onus but requires presumptions of fact or of law to be defined within reasonable limits. As Lord Bingham stated in Brown, there are no hard edged and inflexible statements of principle. A fair balance must be struck. That fair balance permits the existence of a reverse onus in the context of section 139 of the 1988 Act.

Pill LJ Poole J
[2001] EWHC Admin 882
Bailii
Criminal Justice Act 1988 139, Human Rights Act 1988 3, European Convention of Human Rights 6
England and Wales
Citing:
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 – Attorney General of Hong Kong v Lee Kwong-Kut PC 1993
(Hong Kong) In order to maintain the balance between the individual and the society as a whole, rigid and inflexible standards should not be imposed on the legislature’s attempts to resolve the difficult and intransigent problems with which society . .
Cited – Stott (Procurator Fiscal, Dunfermline) and Another v Brown PC 5-Dec-2000
The system under which the registered keeper of a vehicle was obliged to identify herself as the driver, and such admission was to be used subsequently as evidence against her on a charge of driving with excess alcohol, was not a breach of her right . .
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 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 – 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 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 – 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 . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Human Rights

Updated: 19 November 2021; Ref: scu.167260

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 Lordships do not understand what is meant by the phrase ‘evidential burden of proof’. They understand, of course, that in trial by jury a party may be required to adduce some evidence in support of his case, whether on the general issue or on a particular issue, before that issue is left to the jury. How much evidence has to be adduced depends upon the nature of the requirement. It may be such evidence as, if believed and left uncontradicted and unexplained, could be accepted by the jury as proof. It is doubtless permissible to describe the requirement as a burden, and it may be convenient to call it an evidential burden. But it is confusing to call it a burden of proof. Further, it is misleading to call it a burden of proof, whether described as legal or evidential or by any other adjective, when it can be discharged by the production of evidence that falls short of proof. The essence of the appellant’s case is that he has not got to provide any sort of proof that he was acting in private defence. So it is a misnomer to call whatever it is that he has to provide a burden of proof . .’

Lord Devlin
[1970] AC 618, [1969] UKPC 22, [1970] 1 All ER 219, [1970] 2 WLR 448
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Daniel CACD 22-Mar-2002
The defendant appealed a conviction for hiding assets from her receiver following her bankruptcy. He said that recent case law suggested that the burden of establishing the defence under section 352 was evidential only.
Held: The conviction . .
Cited – Lynch v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 8-Nov-2001
The defendant challenged a conviction for having a locked bladed article in his possession in a public place, on the basis that it placed on him a burden of proof contrary to the convention.
Held: Salabiaku permits a reverse onus but requires . .
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: . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 19 November 2021; Ref: scu.184321

Regina v Daniel: CACD 22 Mar 2002

The defendant appealed a conviction for hiding assets from her receiver following her bankruptcy. He said that recent case law suggested that the burden of establishing the defence under section 352 was evidential only.
Held: The conviction predated the Human Rights Act, and was correct at the time. The Carass ruling applied also to the instant section, but since the issue related to interpretation of a statute, and new interpretations of statutes were not retrospective.

Lord Justice Auld, Mr Justice Newman and Mr Justice Roderick Evans
Times 08-Apr-2002, [2002] EWCA Crim 959, [2003] 1 Cr App R 99
Bailii
Insolvency Act 1986 352, Human Rights Act 1998 3(1)
England and Wales
Citing:
Distinguished – 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 . .
Applied – 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 – 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 – Ong Ah Chuan v The Public Prosecutor PC 1980
(Singapore) It was asked whether the mandatory death sentence for trafficking in more than 15 grammes of heroin was unconstitutional. The appellant submitted that the mandatory nature of the sentence rendered it arbitrary, since it debarred the . .

Cited by:
Cited – Barnfather v London Borough of Islington Education Authority, Secretary of State for Education and Skills QBD 7-Mar-2003
The appellant was convicted of the crime of being a parent whose child had failed to attend school regularly. She challenged saying that the offence required no guilty act on her part, but was one of strict liability, and contrary to her human . .
Cited – Regina v G (Secretary of State for the Home Department intervening) HL 18-Jun-2008
The defendant was fifteen. He was convicted of statutory rape of a 13 year old girl, believing her to be 15. He appealed saying that as an offence of strict liability he had been denied a right to a fair trial, and also that the offence charged was . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency, Human Rights, Crime

Updated: 19 November 2021; Ref: scu.168526

Nicklinson and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v A Primary Care Trust: CA 31 Jul 2013

The claimant had suffered a severe form of locked-in syndrome, and would wish to die. He sought a declaration that someone who assisted him in his siuicide would not be prosecuted for murder.
Held: The position in law that voluntary euthanasia was murder, and as to whether the doctrine of necessity provided a defence was long and clearly established in law, and it was not proper to depart from it by judcial law making under the guise of article 8.
Nevertheless, the Director of Public Prosecutions’ policy failed adequately under article 8 to make clear whether a helper would be prosecuted in cases where the helper had no close or emotional connection with the victim.
Lord Dyson MR and Elias LJ (majority) held: ‘Para 43(14) is particularly problematic. How does it apply in the case of a medical doctor or nurse who is caring for a patient and out of compassion is willing to assist the patient to commit suicide, but is not, as it were, in the business of assisting individuals to commit suicide and perhaps has never done so before? How much weight is given by the DPP to para 43(14) alone? And if the professional accepts some payment for undertaking the task, will that be likely to involve a finding that he or she is not wholly motivated by compassion, thereby triggering both paragraph 43(6) and paragraph 43(13)? These questions are of crucial importance to healthcare professionals who may be contemplating providing assistance. It is of no less importance to victims who wish to commit suicide, but have no relative or close friend who is willing and able to help them to do so. Suppose that (i) none of the factors set out in para 43 is present (apart from the para 43(14) factor) and (ii) all of the factors set out in para 44 are present. What is the likelihood of a prosecution in such a situation? The Policy does not say. To adopt the language of the Sunday Times case, even in such a situation, the Policy does not enable the healthcare professional to foresee to a reasonable degree the consequences of providing assistance. In our view, the Policy should give some indication of the weight that the DPP accords to the fact that the helper was acting in his or her capacity as a healthcare professional and the victim was in his or her care. In short, we accept the submission of Mr Havers that the Policy does not provide medical doctors and other professionals with the kind of steer . . that it provides to relatives and close friends acting out of compassion’.
Lord Judge CJ, dissenting, said: ‘ . . it seems clear to me that paragraph 14 addresses the risks which can arise when someone in a position of authority or trust, and on whom the victim would therefore depend to a greater or lesser extent, assisting in the suicide in circumstances in which, just because of the position of authority and trust, the person in authority might be able to exercise undue influence over the victim. As I read this paragraph it does not extend to an individual who happens to be a member of a profession, or indeed a professional carer, brought in from outside, without previous influence or authority over the victim, or his family, for the simple purposes of assisting the suicide after the victim has reached his or her own settled decision to end life, when, although emotionally supportive of him, his wife cannot provide the necessary physical assistance.
Naturally, it would come as no surprise at all for the DPP to decide that a prosecution would be inappropriate in a situation where a loving spouse or partner, as a final act of devotion and compassion assisted the suicide of an individual who had made a clear, final and settled termination to end his or her own life. The Policy . . deliberately does not restrict the decision to withhold consent to family members or close friends acting out of love and devotion. The Policy certainly does not lead to what would otherwise be an extraordinary anomaly, that those who are brought in to help from outside the family circle . . are more likely to be prosecuted than a family member when they do no more than replace a loving member of the family, acting out of compassion, who supports the ‘victim’ to achieve his desired suicide. The stranger brought into this situation, who is not profiteering, but rather assisting to provide services which, if provided by the wife, would not attract a prosecution, seems to me most unlikely to be prosecuted. In my respectful judgment this Policy is sufficiently clear to enable AM, or anyone who assists him, to make an informed decision about the likelihood of prosecution.’

Lord Judge CJ, Lord Dyson MR, Elias LJ
[2013] EWCA Civ 961, [2013] WLR(D) 326
Bailii, WLRD
European Convention on Human Rights 8
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina (on the Application of Pretty) v Director of Public Prosecutions and Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 29-Nov-2001
The applicant was terminally ill, and entirely dependent upon her husband for care. She foresaw a time when she would wish to take her own life, but would not be able to do so without the active assistance of her husband. She sought a proleptic . .
Cited – Pretty v The United Kingdom ECHR 29-Apr-2002
Right to Life Did Not include Right to Death
The applicant was paralysed and suffered a degenerative condition. She wanted her husband to be allowed to assist her suicide by accompanying her to Switzerland. English law would not excuse such behaviour. She argued that the right to die is not . .
Cited – Purdy, Regina (on the Application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 30-Jul-2009
Need for Certainty in Scope of Offence
The appellant suffered a severe chronic illness and anticipated that she might want to go to Switzerland to commit suicide. She would need her husband to accompany her, and sought an order requiring the respondent to provide clear guidelines on the . .
Appeal from – Nicklinson, Regina (on The Application of) v Ministry of Justice Admn 16-Aug-2012
The claimants each suffered ‘locked in syndrome’ after catastrophic health events, and were unable to commit suicide as they would have wished. In one case, the claimant would have needed assistance to travel to a clinic in Switzerland where he . .
See Also – Nicklinson v Ministry of Justice and Others QBD 12-Mar-2012
The claimant suffered locked-in syndrome and sought relief in a form which would allow others to assist him in committing suicide. The court considered whether the case should be allowed to proceed rather than to be struck out as hopeless.
Cited by:
Appeal from – 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 . .
At CA – 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. . .
Cited – Kenward and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v The Director of Public Prosecutions and Another Admn 4-Dec-2015
The claimants challenged the policy issued by the DPP on assisted suicide following the Nicklinson case.
Held: The request for judicial review was refused.
Sir Brian Leveson P said: ‘It is important not to misunderstand the effect either . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Health, Human Rights

Updated: 18 November 2021; Ref: scu.514242

Torfaen County Borough Council v Douglas Willis Ltd: SC 31 Jul 2013

The Council’s officers visited the company’s premises, and after finding there packages of frozen meat whose use date had expired, pursued 23 charges under the 1990 Act and the Regulations. The justices had accepted the company’s argument that the prosecution had to prove that at the date of the alleged offence the food was highly perishable and likely after a short period to constitute an immediate danger to human health.
Held: Under regulation 44(1)(d) it is sufficient for the prosecution to prove that the defendant had food in its possession for the purpose of sale which was the subject of a mark or label showing a ‘use by’ date which had passed. The justices were therefore wrong to accept the company’s submission of no case to answer in relation to the 23 charges brought under that regulation. The answer to the question certified by the Divisional Court is ‘No’.

Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Kerr, Lord Wilson, Lord Carnwath, Lord Toulson
[2013] UKSC 59, [2013] WLR(D) 321, [2013] PTSR 1088, UKSC 2012/0087
Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD, SC Summary, SC
Food Labelling Regulations 1996, Food Safety Act 1990
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Torfaen County Borough Council v Douglas Willis Ltd Admn 20-Feb-2012
The company had been found with frozen meat which had passed the labelled ‘Use by’ date. The magistrates dismissed charges, conclusing that, since they were all frozen at the time of the inspection, they were not then highly perishable and so did . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Crime

Updated: 18 November 2021; Ref: scu.514222

Whitbread, Regina v: CACD 21 Sep 2021

Application on behalf of the Attorney General to refer as unduly lenient a sentence of four years imprisonment for causing grievous bodily harm with intent,

[2021] EWCA Crim 1413
Bailii
England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 18 November 2021; Ref: scu.668580

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 defendant contended that the offence was not committed since nobody had witnessed the offence.
Held: The appeal failed. Proof of the offence of outraging public decency requires two elements: ‘i) The act was of such a lewd character as to outrage public decency; this element constituted the nature of the act which had to be proved before the offence could be established.
ii) It took place in a public place and must have been capable of being seen by two or more persons who were actually present, even if they had not actually seen it. This constituted the public element of the offence which had to be proved.’ Though not seen the acts of the defendant were capable of being seen, and had they been seen would have caused the outrage to the possibility of which the offence was directed.
The court had not been wrong either to join the indictments or not to separate them

Lord Justice Thomas
[2007] EWCA Crim 2062, Times 16-Oct-2007, [2008] 2 WLR 107, [2008] QB 224
Bailii
Protection of Children Act 1978 14
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Sedley’s case 1675
The defendant Sir Charles Sedley showed himself naked on the balcony of a house in Covent Garden in the presence of several people and urinated on them. He was indicted at common law for outraging public decency and pleaded guilty, the magistrate . .
Cited – Delaval’s Case 1763
The defendant was convicted for outraging public decency, having procuring a girl for the purposes of prostitution. . .
Cited – Rose vDirector of Public Prosecutions Admn 16-Mar-2006
The defendant appealed his conviction for outraging public decency by behaving in an indecent manner contrary to common law. He had been in the foyer of a bank at night with a girl who performed oral sex. The action could have been seen, but was . .
Cited – Regina v Mayling 1963
To establish the offence of outraging public decency, it is not necessary to prove that any particular person was outraged. . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Rex v Rouverard 1830
(York) The defendant, a French master was accused of outraging pubic decency: ‘for exposing his person at a window in Micklegate, York, to excite a girl who was a servant on the second floor of the house on the opposite side of the street.’
Cited – Mirehouse v Rennell 1833
Parke B described how the elements of a common law offence are to be distilled from the cases in which the relevant principles have been set out: ‘Our common-law system consists in the applying to new combinations of circumstances those rules of law . .
Cited – Rex v Bunyan and Morgan 1844
The two defendants were seen by a servant through the window to be exposing themselves to each other and committing lewd acts in a parlour room of a public house where they were alone; she summoned others who witnessed the act. The indictment . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Rex v Webb 1848
(Exchequer Chamber) The defendant was accused of having exposed himself to a barmaid in the bar of a public house when there was no one else in sight. The charge was for outraging public decency contrary to common law. She ran off and informed her . .
Cited – Rex v Watson 1847
The defendant having indecently exposed himself in Paddington Churchyard to a 12 year old girl was charged with committing a public nuisance.
Held: Only one person had seen him. The charge could not be sustained unless there had been at least . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Regina v Farell 1862
(Court of Criminal Appeal in Ireland) The defendant exposed himself on a public road so that he was seen by one person as there was only one person passing at the time, though he could have been seen by others who might have been passing.
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Regina v Kray CACD 1969
The court dealt with a case where prejudice was claimed on behalf of the defendant because of publicity before the trial. Lawton J said: ‘The drama of a trial almost always has the effect of excluding from recollection that which went before.’
Cited – Ludlow v Metropolitan Police Commissioner HL 1971
Two offences can constitute a series of offences, but there has to be some nexus between the offences. Lord Pearson said: ‘In my opinion, however, it is important to notice that there has to be a series of offences of a similar character. For this . .
Cited – Regina v Barrell and Wilson CACD 1979
The court set out the test for whether charges could properly be rejoined after severance on the indictment. . .
Cited – Regina v Christou (George) HL 10-May-1996
Separate sex offence charges may be tried together even though the evidence is not to be allowed to be accumulated as between the offences. While the question of the admissibility of ‘similar fact’ evidence in relation to various counts joined in . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 17 November 2021; Ref: scu.258768

HR (Portugal) v Secretary of State for the Home Office: CA 5 May 2009

The claimant had been imprisoned whilst in the UK. He claimed the protection of European law to protect him against a deportation order.
Held: The claimant could not count the time he had served in prison toward the time spent in the UK to calculate his entitlement to stay here. ‘Residence’ in the Regulations means presence in this country exercising of the rights and freedoms conferred by the EU Treaty. An EEA national who, being convicted of a crime, was detained for a significant period in prison or other penal institution, was not resident in this country exercising that right.

Lord Justice Sedley, Lord Justice Stanley Burnton and Lord Justice Elias
[2009] EWCA Civ 371, Times 15-Jun-2009, [2009] WLR(D) 144, [2009] 3 CMLR 9, [2009] 3 CMLR 9, [2010] 1 WLR 158
Bailii
Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations (SI 2006 No 1003), Directive 2004/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of April 29, 2004
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Batista v Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 29-Jul-2010
The claimant appealed against a deportation order requiring his return to Portugal. He said that when considering the effect of the order on his family, the AIT had applied the wrong test.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The test to be applied was . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Crime, European

Updated: 17 November 2021; Ref: scu.343055

Rex v Percy Dalton (London) Ltd: CCA 1949

Birkett J said: ‘Steps on the way to the commission of what would be a crime, if the acts were completed, may amount to attempts to commit that crime, to which, unless interrupted, they would have led ; but steps on the way to the doing of something, which is thereafter done, and which is no crime, cannot be regarded as attempts to commit a crime.’

Birkett J
[1949] 33 Cr App R 102 CCA
England and Wales
Cited by:
Approved – Haughton v Smith, On Appeal From Regina v Smith (Roger) HL 21-Nov-1973
The defendant appealed against his conviction for attempting to handle stolen goods. They were to be delivered to him in a van, but the meat was intercepted and recovered by the police. The defendant argued that he should not be convicted of . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 17 November 2021; Ref: scu.182833

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 in any reasonable person and actually does cause in the accused, a sudden and temporary loss of self-control, rendering the accused so subject to passion as to make him or her for the moment not master of his mind.’

[1949] 1 All ER 932
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Confessor Valdez Franco v The Queen PC 14-Aug-2001
(Antigua and Barbuda) The appellant had been convicted of murder, with his defence of self-defence rejected by the jury. His defence was self-defence. No defence of provocation was advanced at trial and the trial judge gave no direction to the jury . .
Cited – 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 – Serrano, Regina v CACD 1-Dec-2006
The defendant had been convicted of murder in 1972. He now appealed on a reference by the Criminal Cases Review Commission questioning the failure of the judge to direct on provocation. He had killed a girl after they tried but failed to have . .
Approved – 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 . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 17 November 2021; Ref: scu.181235

William and Others v Regina: CACD 18 Jul 2013

The three sister defendants appealed against their convictions and sentences for converting and transferring criminal property. Their father had conducted a security business in a fraudulent manner, and they had been accused of being involved with its management. Each had denied knowing of any criminal activity.

Elias LJ, MacKay J
[2013] EWCA Crim 1262
Bailii
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 327
England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 17 November 2021; Ref: scu.513396