Category: Crime

Hamilton and Another v The Queen: PC 16 Aug 2012

(Jamaica) The Board emphasised the need for the use of procedures designed to speed criminal appeals.

Citations:

[2012] UKPC 31, [2012] 1 WLR 2875

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Taitt v The State PC 8-Nov-2012
(Trinidad and Tobago) The defendant sought leave to appeal against his conviction for murder, with the death penalty mandatory sentence. He was of severely low intelligence.
Held: The appeal against conviction would not be allowed. Settled law . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Crime

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.463663

Sammon v Regina: CACD 18 May 2011

Appeal against conviction with the leave of the single judge to argue three grounds concerning, principally, the trial judge’s exercise of discretion under section 78 Police and Criminal Evidence 1984, and a renewed application to argue four further grounds.

Judges:

Lord Justice Pitchford

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Crim 1199

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.439827

Anonymous (Burglary): 1830

‘ It is absurd to indict for burglary now, where a theft is committed, in addition to the breaking entering ; in cases of intent without actual theft, it is otherwise.’

Citations:

[1830] EngR 12, (1830) 1 Lewin 37, (1830) 168 ER 950 (B)

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.320892

Regina v Gemmell: CACD 17 Jul 2002

Dyson LJ said: ‘The position is quite clear. So far as Article 6 is concerned, the fairness of the provisions of the substantive law of the Contracting States is not a matter for investigation. The content and interpretation of domestic substantive law is not engaged by Article 6.’

Judges:

Dyson LJ

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Crim 1992, [2003] 1 Cr App R 343

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Applied – 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.

Crime, Human Rights

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.270007

John Kimball Stewart v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 2 Jun 2003

The defendant gave two specimens of breath, but they differed so markedly that the officer considered them unreliable. He offered the defendant the choice of a further two attempts or to give a specimen of blood or urine. He was convicted on the second set of breath tests. He appealed, saying he should not have been required to give such further specimens.
Held: The first tests were nugatory, and accordingly the second set were arguably the first. The Act required the officer to offer the choice for a blood test. He had done that, and had not required the second set of breath tests. The conviction stood.

Judges:

The Hon Mr Justice Goldring The Lord Chief Justice Of England &Amp; Wales

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 1323 (Admin), Times 07-Jul-2003, [2003] RTR 35

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Road Traffic Act 1988 4 5 7(1)(a) 11(3)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Jubb v Director of Public Prosecutions 2002
The arrested driver was given a warning under section 7(7) before two specimens of breath were obtained. The officer thought the specimens unreliable being of uneven volume. The officer then gave the appellant the chance to repeat the breath . .

Cited by:

Cited – Edmond v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 23-Feb-2006
The defendant appealed his conviction for driving with excess alcohol. The readings on the Intoximeter were too wide apart and the officer requested a blood specimen. He complained that he had not been given a fresh warning before this request.
Cited – Hussain v the Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 19-Mar-2008
Appeal by case stated – conviction for failing to provide specimen of breath. Machine at one station had failed on two occasions – defendant taken to second station and re-tested. Whether third test request lawful.
Held: In completing the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Road Traffic

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.183712

Regina (O) v Harrow Crown Court: Admn 16 Apr 2003

The defendant had been refused bail. He had a previous conviction for rape, and now faced another charge. The custody time limit had also now expired. He complained that the removal of the statutory presumption in favour of bail infringed his rights.
Held: Under s25, a defendant in this category should be granted bail only in exceptional circumstances. Was that section incompatible with the defendants article 5 rights? Such persons posed a substantial risk if released. The section allowed for exceptions, and was not incompatible. The question of whether the court was satisfied that exceptional grounds existed should not be construed narrowly. Justices should set out reasoned findings under the section. (Hooper) S25 should be read down so as to impose only an evidential burden on the defendant.

Judges:

Kennedy LJ, Hooper J

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 868 (Admin), Times 29-May-2003, [2003] 1 WLR 2756

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 5, Bail Act 1976 4(1) 25, Prosecution of Offences (Custody Time Limits) Regulations 1987 (1987 No 299) 5(6B)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Hurnam v The State PC 15-Dec-2005
(Mauritius) The defendant complained that the Mauritian Bail Act as interpreted contravened his Human Rights.
Held: ‘a person charged with a serious offence, facing a severe penalty if convicted, may well have a powerful incentive to abscond . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Human Rights

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.182726

Waghorn v Care Quality Commission: Admn 11 Jul 2012

W, a registered medical practitioner, appealed by way of case stated against the decision that he had carried on an independent hospital without being registered in respect of it under Part II of the Care Standards Act 2000, contrary to section 11 (1) of that Act.

Judges:

Cox DBE J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 1816 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Health Professions, Crime

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.462911

Camden v Mortgage Times Group Ltd: Admn 3 Jul 2006

The defendant was a producer of controlled waste. It had left waste out for collection. The prosecutor appealed the acquittal of the defendant for failing to prevent escape of such waste.
Held: The appeal failed. The prosecutor had to show that there had been a failure to take reasonable care to avoid the escape. A simple assertion that there had been an escape was not enough, and indeed the failure to take care might be established without an escape having taken place.

Citations:

Times 15-Aug-2006, [2006] EWHC (Admin) 1615

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Environmental Protection Act 1990 34(1)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Gateway Professional Services (Management) Ltd v Kingston Upon Hull City Council Admn 8-Mar-2004
An employee of the appellant had deposited a number of black bags containing commercial office waste on the land adjoining the appellant’s own premises. The prosecutor said that the deposit of the bags of waste in those circumstances amounted to an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Environment, Crime

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.242957

RP and Others v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 25 May 2012

Appeal from conviction for robbery – theft of cigarette out of victim’s hand.
Held: The appeal was allowed. The court recognised the distinction between force applied to the object and the person: ‘ This case falls squarely on the side of pickpocketing and such like, in which there is no direct physical contact between thief and victim. It cannot be said that the minimal use of force required to remove a cigarette from between the fingers of a person suffices to amount to the use of force on that person. It cannot cause any pain unless, perhaps, the person resists strongly, in which case one would expect inevitably that there would be direct physical contact between the thief and victim as well. The unexpected removal of a cigarette from between the fingers of a person is no more the use of force on that person than would be the removal of an item from her pocket. This offence is properly categorised as simple theft.’

Judges:

Mitting J

Citations:

[2013] 1 WLR 2337, [2012] EWHC 1657 (Admin), [2013] Crim LR 151, [2013] 1 Cr App R 7

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Dawson and James CACD 1977
At Liverpool Pier Head a sailor on shore leave waiting for the ferry was surrounded by two men, one standing on either side of him, who nudged him on the shoulder, causing him to lose his balance. While trying to keep his balance, a third man got . .
Cited – Regina v Clouden CACD 1987
The appellant approached a woman who was carrying a shopping basket in her left hand from behind and wrenched it down and out of her grasp with both hands and ran off with it. He was convicted of robbery.
Held: His appeal was dismissed.
‘The . .
Cited – Rex v Thomas Gnosil 14-Mar-1824
Garrow B considered the nature of the force involved in an act of robbery at common law: ”The mere act of taking being forcible will not make this offence highway robbery; to constitute the crime of highway robbery the force used must be either . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.461875

Othman v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SIAC 6 Feb 2012

Application for bail.

Judges:

Mitting J

Citations:

[2012] UKSIAC B1

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Omar Othman v The United Kingdom ECHR 26-May-2009
Statement of Facts. The applicant resisted deportation to Jordan to face trial on on terrorism related charges, saying that there was a real risk that the evidence to be presented against him would include evidence obtained by torture. . .
At ECHR – Omar Othman (Abu Qatada) v The United Kingdom ECHR 17-Jan-2012
The applicant resisted his proposed deportation to Jordan to face charges of terrorism. He complained was that his retrial in Jordan would amount to a flagrant denial of justice because of a number of factors including a very real risk that . .

Cited by:

SIAC Bail Application – Othman (Abu Qatada) v The United Kingdom ECHR 9-May-2012
(Press Release) Diplomatic assurances will protect Abu Qatada from torture but he cannot be deported to Jordan while there remains a real risk that evidence obtained by torture will be used against him. . .
Bail Application – Othman v Secretary of State for The Home Department SIAC 28-May-2012
SIAC (Deportation – Bail Application – Refused) The applicant was held in immigration detention pending a proposed deportation to his native Jordan to face retrial on terrorist charges. Having resisted his . .
SIAC Bail application – Othman, Regina (on The Application of) v Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) and Others Admn 9-Aug-2012
The court gave its reasons for refusing the claimant’s applications for habeas corpus and permission to seek judicial review of his detention. He was detained pending deportation to Jordan. He resisted saying that if retried in Jordan, the evidence . .
SIAC Bail Application – Othman (Abu Qatada) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SIAC 12-Nov-2012
The applicant challenged his proposed deportation to Jordan to face perrorism related charges. He said that there was a real risk that the evidence used against him would have been obtained by torture.
Held: His appeal was allowed . .
SIAC Bail Application – Othman (Aka Abu Qatada) v Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 27-Mar-2013
The appellant sought the deportation of the respondent to his home country of Jordan to face trial on terrorism related charges. The respondent said that evidence against him would have been obtained by torture, and challenged re-assurances accepted . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Crime

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.461825

J1 v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SIAC 15 Apr 2011

Deportation – Substantive (National Security) – Dismissed

Citations:

[2011] UKSIAC 98/2010)

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

See Also – J1 v Secretary of State for The Home Department SIAC 11-Jul-2011
Deportation – Substantive (Safety On Return) – Dismissed . .
At SIAC – J1 v Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 27-Mar-2013
The applicant said that his proposed deportation to Ethiopia would infringe his article 3 rights, and in particular whether SIAC was entitled to conclude that assurances given by the Ethiopian Government were a satisfactory safeguard, even though . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Crime

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.461843

Othman v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SIAC 28 May 2012

SIAC (Deportation – Bail Application – Refused) The applicant was held in immigration detention pending a proposed deportation to his native Jordan to face retrial on terrorist charges. Having resisted his deportation at the Eropean Court of Human Rights, he now applied for bail.
Held: The request for bail was rejected.

Judges:

Mitting J

Citations:

[2012] UKSIAC 15/2005

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Omar Othman v The United Kingdom ECHR 26-May-2009
Statement of Facts. The applicant resisted deportation to Jordan to face trial on on terrorism related charges, saying that there was a real risk that the evidence to be presented against him would include evidence obtained by torture. . .
At ECHR – Omar Othman (Abu Qatada) v The United Kingdom ECHR 17-Jan-2012
The applicant resisted his proposed deportation to Jordan to face charges of terrorism. He complained was that his retrial in Jordan would amount to a flagrant denial of justice because of a number of factors including a very real risk that . .
ECHR PR – Othman (Abu Qatada) v The United Kingdom ECHR 9-May-2012
(Press Release) Diplomatic assurances will protect Abu Qatada from torture but he cannot be deported to Jordan while there remains a real risk that evidence obtained by torture will be used against him. . .
Bail Application – Othman v Secretary of State for The Home Department SIAC 6-Feb-2012
Application for bail. . .

Cited by:

SIAC – Othman, Regina (on The Application of) v Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) and Others Admn 9-Aug-2012
The court gave its reasons for refusing the claimant’s applications for habeas corpus and permission to seek judicial review of his detention. He was detained pending deportation to Jordan. He resisted saying that if retried in Jordan, the evidence . .
SIAC – Othman (Abu Qatada) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SIAC 12-Nov-2012
The applicant challenged his proposed deportation to Jordan to face perrorism related charges. He said that there was a real risk that the evidence used against him would have been obtained by torture.
Held: His appeal was allowed . .
SIAC Baill – Othman (Aka Abu Qatada) v Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 27-Mar-2013
The appellant sought the deportation of the respondent to his home country of Jordan to face trial on terrorism related charges. The respondent said that evidence against him would have been obtained by torture, and challenged re-assurances accepted . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Crime

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.461829

Zatuliveter v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SIAC 29 Sep 2011

SIAC Deportation – The Hearing of An Application By The Appellant – Refused – the Court or Commission can make findings of primary facts from which it can decide the principal issue in controversy – recusal of tribunal member

Judges:

Mitting J

Citations:

[2011] UKSIAC 103/2010)

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Lord Carlile and Others v Secretary of State for The Home Department Admn 16-Mar-2012
The claimant had invited an Iranian dissident to speak in Parliament, and now challenged the decision of the Home Secretary to refuse her a visa on the basis that her exclusion was not conducive to the public good. She was a member of an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Crime

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.461849

J1 v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SIAC 11 Jul 2011

Deportation – Substantive (Safety On Return) – Dismissed

Judges:

Mitting J

Citations:

[2011] UKSIAC 98/2010)

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

See Also – J1 v Secretary of State for The Home Department SIAC 15-Apr-2011
Deportation – Substantive (National Security) – Dismissed . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – J1 v Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 27-Mar-2013
The applicant said that his proposed deportation to Ethiopia would infringe his article 3 rights, and in particular whether SIAC was entitled to conclude that assurances given by the Ethiopian Government were a satisfactory safeguard, even though . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Crime

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.461845

Director of Public Prosecutions v Stoke on Trent Magistrates Court: Admn 16 Jun 2003

The director appealed by way of case stated against a dismissal of a charge of chanting words of a racialist nature at a football match. He had called out to opposing supporters from Oldham ‘You’re just a town full of Pakis’. The district judge had found the words to be mere doggerel.
Held: It was implicit in the words that the people against whom it was directed were inferior because an association with people of Pakistani origin. It was intended as an insult. It was used in an abusive manner, and was within the mischief.

Judges:

Auld LJ, Goldring J

Citations:

Times 23-Jun-2003, [2003] EWHC 1593 (Admin), Gazette 28-Aug-2003

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Football Offences Act 1991 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 01 November 2022; Ref: scu.183874

S v Regina: CACD 20 Jan 2015

The defendant appealed out of time from a finding of guilt of rape, having first been declared unfit to plead (through autism), and the consequent Hospital Order.

Judges:

President of the Queens Bench Division
(Sir Brian Leveson)
Mr Justice Openshaw
And
Mr Justice Dove

Citations:

[2014] EWCA Crim 2648

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 4(5)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 01 November 2022; Ref: scu.543087

Sadeer, Regina v: CACD 8 Nov 2018

Judges:

Bean LJ

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Crim 3000

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Hamilton and Others v Post Office Ltd CACD 15-Jan-2021
Good Reason to Pursue Second Appeal
The appellants had been convicted of fraud against the Post Office. The Criminal Cases Review Commission referred their convictions on two grounds, namely abuse of process for the inability to provide a fair trial, and that the trial was an affront . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 01 November 2022; Ref: scu.634165

JS v R: CACD 29 Sep 2009

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Crim 2972

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Saunders v The United Kingdom ECHR 17-Dec-1996
(Grand Chamber) The subsequent use against a defendant in a prosecution, of evidence which had been obtained under compulsion in company insolvency procedures was a convention breach of Art 6. Although not specifically mentioned in Article 6 of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 01 November 2022; Ref: scu.460571