Category: Crime

Surrey Trading Standards, Regina (on The Application of) v Scottish and Southern Energy Plc: CACD 16 Mar 2012

The defendant appealed against its conviction on counts under the 2008 Regulations.

Judges:

Davis LJ, Nicol J, Kramer QC

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Crim 539

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Consumer (Protection from Unfair Trading) Regulations 2008

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime, Consumer

Updated: 05 October 2022; Ref: scu.452153

Regina v Tierney and Another: CACD 15 Oct 2009

The defendants appealed against convictions for assault occasioning actual bodily harm on a reference from the Criminal Cases Review Commission. They were police officers said to have assaulted others at a party. The judge had been persuaded not to leave a conviction for common assault to the jury. The jury had then asked whether they could find assault but without injury, and on the judge saying ‘No’ had convicted them of the full offence.
Held: The appeals succeeded, and convictions for common assault substituted: ‘in view of the jury’s question, there is no way in which we can know, and it would be wrong to deduce anything from the jury question itself than that it may realistically have reflected some possible doubt in the mind of one or more of the jury whether the evidence that actual bodily harm had been caused was sufficiently convincing.’

Judges:

Lord Judge LCJ, Penry-Davey, Keith JJ

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Crim 2220

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.377767

Director of Public Prosecutions v Majewski: CACD 1975

The defendant appealed against his conviction for assault saying that he was so intoxicated on drink and drugs at the time that he did not have mens rea.
Held: The appeal failed. The court certified a question for the House of Lords namely: ‘Whether a defendant may properly be convicted of assault notwithstanding that, by reason of his self-induced intoxication, he did not intend to do the act alleged to constitute the assault’.
Lawton LJ said: ‘The facts are commonplace-indeed so commonplace that their very nature reveals how serious from a social and public standpoint the consequences would be if men could behave as the [appellant] did and then claim that they were not guilty of any offence.’

Judges:

Lawton LJ

Citations:

[1975] 3 WLR 401, (1976) 62 Cr App R 5

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1967 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Director of Public Prosecutions v Majewski HL 1976
The defendant took a cocktail of drink and drugs and, whilst intoxicated, assaulted pub landlord. He said that he did not know what he was doing, and had no mens rea, that self-induced intoxication could be a defence to a charge of assault, and that . .
Cited – Achogbuo, Regina v CACD 19-Mar-2014
The Court considered a renewed application for leave to appeal which the Registrar had considered to be without merit and was referred under section 20 of the 1968 Act.
Held: The reference had been properly made. The application for extension . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.270321

Crown Prosecution Service v Inegbu: Admn 26 Nov 2008

The CPS appealed aganst a decision on a charge under the railway byelaws, that the charge be dismissed, the prosecution not having formally proved in accordance with any applicable statutory provision. The byelaws had in fact been properly introduced, but the 2000 Act had been repealed and replaced by the 2005 Act. The certificate provided had been made under the 2000 Act.
Held: The appeal succeeded. Davis J said: ‘If there is here a seeming lacuna in the legislation, plainly not filling Parliament’s intention, I think that in this particular case it can be properly filled by the court by a process of interpretation: and section 46(4) of the 2005 Act in my view is, on its wording, sufficient to convey the continuing applicability of Schedule 20 to byelaws made under the 2000 Act which continue in effect.’
Latham LJ said: ‘the intention of Parliament can be clearly gleaned from the structure of the amended legislation which envisaged that the byelaws would continue in effect, which could only be an effective provision if continued together with the procedural provisions in Schedule 2. It seems to me that there is no need to go, therefore, beyond section 46(4) in order to provide the right answer.’

Judges:

Latham LJ, Davis J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 3242 (Admin), [2009] 1 WLR 2327

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Transport Act 2000 219, Railways Act 2005, Interpretation Act 1978 16 17

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Crown Prosecution Service, Regina (on the Application of) v Bow Street Magistrates Court and others Admn 18-Jul-2006
The defendants were said to have been found in possession of false passports. They successfully argued that the offence charged under the 1981 Act had been repealed by the 2006 Act. The prosecutor argued that a Schedule only came into effect when . .
Cited – Inco Europe Ltd and Others v First Choice Distributors (A Firm) and Others HL 10-Mar-2000
Although the plain words of the Act would not allow an appeal to the Court of Appeal under the circumstances presently applying, it was clear that the parliamentary draftsman had failed to achieve what he had wanted to, that the omission was in . .
Cited – Floor v Davis (Inspector of Taxes) HL 1979
The House considered whether the meaning of the phrase ‘a person having control’ extended to control by more than one person. This depended on whether the word ‘person’ in the singular was to be construed as including the plural.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Transport

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.293930

Fletcher and Another v Director of Public Porsecutions and Another: CA 3 Dec 2001

‘Whether a banning order made pursuant to section 14A Football Spectators Act 1989, as amended by the Football (Disorder) Act 2000, amounts to a penalty within the meaning of the second sentence of Article 7(1) European Convention on Human Rights.’

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 1874

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime, Human Rights

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.218609

Regina v Randall (EP): CACD 21 Feb 2003

The defendant had been a co-accused on a charge of murder. He appealed saying the judge had incorrectly directed the jury on the relevance of his co-accused’s previous convictions for violence.
Held: The appeal was allowed. He should have been allowed in his own defence to bring in evidence of the co-accused’s previous violent record as evidence of that defendant’s propensity to violence.

Judges:

Mr Justice Mccombe Lord Justice Kennedy Mr Justice Treacy

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Crim 436

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed to – Regina v Randall HL 18-Dec-2003
Two defendants accused of murder each sought to place blame for the victim’s death on the other. One sought to rely upon the other’s record of violence as evidence of his co-accused’s propensity to violence.
Held: The record was admissible. By . .
Approved – Lowery v The Queen PC 1974
(Victoria) A young girl was sadistically murdered. The two accused, were present and the crime was committed by one or the other, or both. Each brought evidence of the unlikelihood that he could have committed the murder. L emphasised his good . .
Cited – Regina v Miller 1952
The fact that a defendant has previous convictions is not normally relevant: ‘The fundamental principle, equally applicable to any question that is asked by the defence as to any question that is asked by the prosecution, is that it is not normally . .
Cited – Regina v Murray CACD 10-Jun-1994
If one defendant claims a defence of duress from fear of the other’s driving, the other driver’s driving convictions are relevant and can be admitted in evidence. Evidence of the convictions of the other driver should have been admitted even though . .
Cited – Regina v Lee CACD 1976
A defendant charged with burglary of a house should have been allowed to introduce into evidence the bad character of others, not called as witnesses, who had access to the house. The relevance of this evidence is that it goes to disposition. . .
Cited – Regina v Thompson and others CACD 1995
The court considered the circumstances under which an accused could call in aid the convictions of a co-defendant:
Held: It was fundamental that it is not normally relevant to enquire into a defendant’s previous character or to ask questions . .
Cited – Regina v Vye etc CACD 7-Apr-1993
Detailed guidance was given on good character directions, as to how and when they should be given, but: ‘Provided that the judge indicates to the jury the two respects in which good character may be relevant, ie credibility and propensity, this . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina v Randall HL 18-Dec-2003
Two defendants accused of murder each sought to place blame for the victim’s death on the other. One sought to rely upon the other’s record of violence as evidence of his co-accused’s propensity to violence.
Held: The record was admissible. By . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Evidence

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.179575

Regina v Siddiqi: CACD 20 Dec 2000

The defendant appealed a conviction for robbery. Two other older youths had been involved, and he claimed to have had minimal involvement and to have acted under duress. He complained that expert psychiatric evidence as to his susceptibility to duress had been excluded. On appeal, he sought the admission of the evidence under the Act.
Held: The evidence was properly excluded. The evidence related really to the time after the offence, not before or at the time of it, and the reports were not consistent or certain.

Judges:

Lord Justice Waller Mr Justice Douglas Brown And His Honour Judge Stephens Qc

Citations:

[2000] EWCA Crim 79

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Appeal Act 1968 23(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.158729

Regina v Shevki and Another: CACD 14 Dec 2000

The making of a confiscation order is part of sentencing. Such an order might be delayed provided the determination was made within six months of conviction. If in the circumstances of the case of an adjournment beyond that period was necessary, whether or not the information gathering process had been completed, an extension of time could be given without invalidating the later order. The two statutory schemes for making such determinations can be reconciled. There was no need to make such a ruling on each occasion the matter was adjourned, once an initial order had been made.

Citations:

Times 11-Jan-2001, [2000] EWCA Crim 70, [2001] 2 Cr App R(S) 178

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Drug Trafficking Act 1994 3(1) 3(4)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

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

Criminal Sentencing, Crime

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.158720

Regina v Gill: CACD 21 Jul 2000

When a defendant was silent, it was necessary for the court to be especially careful to give precise and accurate directions on the effect of such silence as to the drawing of adverse inferences. Having answered questions on some aspects, it was not possible for the court to separate out the issues safely so as to allow an adverse inference to be drawn, and the judge’s directions failed properly to identify clearly all six issues as required in R v Argent

Citations:

Times 17-Aug-2000, [2000] EWCA Crim 49, [2001] 1 Cr App R 11

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 33

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Argent CACD 16-Dec-1996
The defendant complained that, after acting on his solicitor’s advice to not answer questions when interviewed by the police, the court had allowed the jury to draw inferences from his failure. The police had failed to make such full disclosure of . .

Cited by:

Cited – Petkar and Farquar, Regina v CACD 16-Oct-2003
The defendants appealed their convictions and sentence for theft. Whilst employed by a bank thay had arranged for transfers to their own account. Each blamed the other. They appealed on the basis that the direction on their silence at interview was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Crime

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.158699

Regina v Clark: CACD 2 Oct 2000

Judges:

Henry LJ, Bracewell and Richards JJ

Citations:

[2000] EWCA Crim 54, [2000] All ER (D) 1219

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Regina v Sally Clark CACD 11-Apr-2003
The defendant appealed against her conviction for the murder of her two infant children by, in the one case, smothering and, in the other, suffocation. Amongst the experts called at her trial by the Crown was Professor Sir Roy Meadow. The . .
Cited – Regina v Doheny, Adams CACD 31-Jul-1996
The court set out the procedure for the introduction of DNA evidence in criminal trials. In particular the court explained the ‘Prosecutor’s Fallacy’ when using statistical evidence. The significance of the DNA evidence will depend critically upon . .
Cited – Regina v Deen CACD 21-Dec-1993
The statistical basis of DNA evidence presented to the court was incorrect in principle. It suffered from the ‘prosecutor’s fallacy’. The court described the nature of DNA evidence: ‘The process of DNA profiling starts with DNA being extracted from . .

Cited by:

Cited – Kent County Council v The Mother, The Father, B (By Her Children’s Guardian); Re B (A Child) (Disclosure) FD 19-Mar-2004
The council had taken the applicant’s children into care alleging that the mother had harmed them. In the light of the subsequent cases casting doubt on such findings, the mother sought the return of her children. She applied now that the hearings . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.158704

Regina v Lee: CACD 29 Sep 2000

‘whether on a charge, under s38 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, of assault with intent to resist lawful apprehension for failing a roadside breathalyser test, it is a defence that the defendant honestly believed that he had not failed the test. Put another way, and more widely, does the mens rea for assault with intent to resist lawful apprehension include an absence of honest belief in the defendant that the arrest was lawful?’

Citations:

[2000] EWCA Crim 53

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.158703

Regina v Hardwicke and Thwaites: CACD 10 Nov 2000

Malpractice or entrapment by those outside the legal system was not to be considered in the same way as such behaviour by those who had a formal part in the investigation of crime. That a journalist might encourage a crime for a story should not necessarily lead to exclusion of the evidence. The journalist’s crime was venial in comparison to that of the appellants, and their behaviour would not undermine trust as would similar behaviour in law enforcement officers.

Judges:

Lord Justice Kennedy Justice Alliott and Justice Bell

Citations:

Times 16-Nov-2000, [2000] EWCA Crim 60

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 78

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Evidence, Media, Crime

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.158710

Lauchlan and Another v Her Majesty’s Advocate: HCJ 8 Feb 2012

Citations:

[2012] ScotHC HCJAC – 20

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

See Also – Lauchlan and Another v HM Advocate HCJ 5-Jun-2009
The appellants were charged with murder. They appealed against an extension of time given to allow the prosecution to proceed.
Held: The appeal failed. . .
See Also – HM Advocate v Lauchlan and Another SCS 17-Jul-2009
Decision as to preliminary issues raised. . .
See Also – HM Advocate v Lauchlan and Another HCJ 14-Jan-2010
. .
See Also – HM Advocate v Lauchlan and Another HCJ 2-Jul-2010
. .

Cited by:

See Also – Lauchlan and Another v HM Advocate HCJ 19-Apr-2012
. .
See Also – O’Neill v The United Kingdom ECHR 13-Nov-2012
. .
See Also – O’Neill v Her Majesty’s Advocate No 2 SC 13-Jun-2013
The appellants had been convicted of murder, it being said that they had disposed of her body at sea. They now said that the delay between being first questioned and being charged infringed their rights to a trial within a reasonable time, and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.451014

Court, Regina v: CACD 9 Feb 2012

The defendants appealed against their convictions under common law for keeping a disorderly house. They were landlords using an agreement requiring the tenant not to be used for immoral purposes. There was evidence of limited sexual activity. Only one girl had been seen and therefore the charge under the 1956 Act was withdrawn.
Held: the common law offence had not been abolished. Nevertheless even at their highest the acts alleged could not amount to the offence: ‘The criminality which should have been alleged was that the appellants allowed the premises of which they were tenants to be used for prostitution. That however cannot be an appropriate basis for upholding the use of the common law charge.’

Judges:

Judge LCJ, Holman, Openshaw JJ

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Crim 133

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Sexual Offences Act 1956 33A, Sexual Offences Act 2003

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Rex v Berg and others CCA 1927
The defendants were said to have conducted a disorderly house in providing exhibitions of a perverted nature.
Held: The common law offence of keeping a disorderly house is committed when the house is so conducted as to violate law and good . .
Cited – Regina v Quinn and Others 1962
Premises were used for the performance of acts which were ‘seriously indecent and, in some respects, revolting’, and the public was invited to resort to the premises for indulging in ‘perverted and revolting practices’.
Held: The conviction . .
Cited – Regina v Tan CA 1983
Tan and others were accused of keeping a disorderly house having advertised: ‘Humiliation enthusiast, my favourite past time is humiliating and disciplining mature male submissives, in strict bondage, lovely tan coloured mistress invites humble . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.450998

MT (Article 1F (A) – Aiding and Abetting) Zimbabwe: UTIAC 2 Feb 2012

UTIAC In the context of exclusion under Article 1F(a) of the 1951 Refugee Convention (Article 12(2)(a) of 2004/83/EC (the Refugee Qualification Directive):
i) The requirement set out at Article 7(1) of the International Criminal Court Statute (ICC Statute) that acts be ‘committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population with knowledge of the attack’ (the ‘chapeau requirement’) is an essential element in the definition of a crime against humanity.
ii) In principle the question of whether acts are ‘committed as part of a widespread or systematic attacks directed against any civilian population’ is a matter that could be dealt with in future country guidance cases; although the question of whether there exist acts with such a nexus must ultimately be decided on a case-by-case basis.
iii) Commission of a crime against humanity or other excludable act can take the form of commission as an aider and abettor, as a subsidiary (or non-principal) form of participation. Drawing on international criminal law jurisprudence (as enjoined by R (JS) (Sri Lanka) v SSHD [2010] UKSC 15), aiding and abetting in this context encompasses any assistance, physical or psychological, that has a substantial effect on the commission of the crime, i.e. the contribution should facilitate the commission of a crime in some significant way.
iv) The fact that the Article 7(1)(a)-(g)list of acts capable of being crimes against humanity does not include the ‘cover-up’ of murders, whilst a surprising lacuna, should not be filled by judicial interpretation.
v) Duress is a defence to international criminal responsibility (see Article 31(1)(d) of the ICC Statute). Again, drawing on international criminal law jurisprudence, such a defence is confined to situations where the defendant’s freedom of will and decision is so severely limited that there is eventually no moral choice of counter activity available. It has four components: the threat must be of imminent death or continuing or imminent serious bodily harm; the threat must result in duress causing the crime; a threat results in duress only if it is otherwise avoidable (i.e. if a reasonable person in comparable circumstances would have submitted and would have been driven to the relevant criminal conduct); and the act directed at avoiding the threat must be necessary in terms of no other means being available and reasonable for reaching the desired effect.

Judges:

Latter SIJ

Citations:

[2012] UKUT 15 (IAC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Human Rights, Crime

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.450984

Brown v The State: PC 7 Feb 2012

(Trinidad and Tobago) The Board expressed its concern at the fact that reports as to the appellant’s ability to instruct counsel were produced ex post facto and without any explanation as to why medical evidence on the issue of fitness had not been produced in the courts below. It wished to make clear that it should not be assumed that even highly persuasive evidence produced for the first time at the final appeal stage would be admitted

Judges:

Lord Brown, Lord Kerr, Lord Clarke, Lord Dyson, Sir Declan Morgan

Citations:

[2012] [2012] UKPC 2, [2012] 2 Cr App R 21, [2012] 1 WLR 1577

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

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.

Crime

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.450613

HM Advocate v Savage: HCJ 21 May 1923

The Court considered whether a borderline insanity was an impairment for the purposes of homicide.

Citations:

[1923] ScotHC HCJ – 1, 1923 JC 49

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

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: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.279158

Director of Public Prosecutions v Patterson: Admn 19 Oct 2004

Prosecutor’s appeal against dismissal of charge for possession of offensive weapon. The defendant had a butterfly knife with him when arrested. the respondent went with his father to a shopping precinct at 3 o’clock on the day concerned and that he intended to leave a butterfly knife that he had with him at the shop where his father worked.
Held: The Magistrates were entitled to take the view that, on the facts of this case, there was a reasonable excuse.

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 2744 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Prevention of Crime Act 1953 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Hynde Admn 3-Jul-1997
A butterfly knife is an offensive weapon per se in that it is made for use for causing injury to the person. . .
Cited – Southwell v Chadwick CACD 1987
It was a reasonable excuse for a person to have in his possession a machete knife in its scabbard and a catapult for use for killing grey squirrels, so that he could obtain food for his wild birds. The court was mainly concerned as to whether the . .
Cited – Gibson v Wallace 1983
Where a person is in possession of an article by its nature an offensive weapon, there will be ‘a very heavy burden on any person in possession . . . to satisfy any court that he had it for such an innocent purpose’ to constitute a reasonable . .
Cited – Regina v Densu CACD 7-Nov-1997
Where an object is in its nature an offensive weapon, the offence of possession is committed even though the possessor had no idea of the true nature of the object: ‘it could not be a reasonable excuse to say that he had [an offensive weapon] with . .
Cited – Houghton v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester 1986
An off-duty policeman was returning from a fancy dress party in a policeman’s uniform, carrying a truncheon. The issue arose in the course as to whether or not that would constitute an offence.
Held: The words ‘reasonable excuse’ in section . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.219928

Pham v The Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 20 Sep 2018

Deprivation of citizenship – alleged involvement in terrorist training

Judges:

Arden, Singh, Coulson LJJ

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Civ 2064, [2018] WLR(D) 594, [2019] 1 WLR 2070, [2019] Imm AR 296, [2019] 4 All ER 199, [2019] INLR 327

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Crime

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.622625

AT v Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 7 Feb 2012

The claimant challenged a non-derogation control order.

Judges:

Maurice Kay LJ VP, Carnwath LJ, Lloyd LJ

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 42

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Bank Mellat v Her Majesty’s Treasury (No 1) SC 19-Jun-2013
Closed Material before Supreme Court
Under the 2009 order, the appellant Bank had been effectively shut down as to its operations within the UK. It sought to use the appeal procedure, and now objected to the use of closed material procedure. The Supreme Court asked itself whether it . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Human Rights

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.450587

OB v The Director of The Serious Fraud Office: CACD 1 Feb 2012

The court was asked whether a breach of an order under section 41 of the 2002 Act was a civil or a criminal contempt of court. The defendant had fled to the US to avoid complying with restraint orders on being investigated for financial fraud. He had been found guilty of contempt after fleeing.
Held: A breach of a restraint order involves at least a civil contempt of court. The court upheld an order of the Common Serjeant committing the defendant to prison for contempt of court in disobeying a restraint order made against him under section 41 of the 2002 Act.

Judges:

Gross LJ, Openshaw J, HHJ Milford QC

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Crim 67, [2012] Lloyd’s Rep FC 389, [2012] 1 WLR 3170, [2012] 3 All ER 999

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 41

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Kenny v Regina CACD 30-Jan-2013
The appellant had made a loan to a third party defendant in criminal fraud proceedings. At the time he did not know that that third party was subject to a restraint order under the 2002 Act. When he did come to know of the order he was asked to say . .
See Also – OB v The Director of The Serious Fraud Office CACD 2-May-2012
The court considered an application by the defendant for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court, noting that section 13 of the 1960 Act did not provide for such a right after the 2006 Act.
Held: The words could not themselves be construed to . .
Appeal from – Regina v O’Brien SC 2-Apr-2014
The court considered how to apply the rule that an extradition may only be for trial on matters committed before the extradition if they have been the basis of the request to a defendant’s commission of contempt of court after conviction. After . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Contempt of Court

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.450559

Regina v PD: CACD 26 Jan 2012

The appellant was charged with offences of violence against his wife. He also faced charges of anal rape of his wife. In the course of evidence the appellant, who otherwise had no previous convictions, admitted using violence towards his wife during the course of his marriage. The judge agreed to give to the jury in respect to the allegations of anal rape the propensity limb of the good character direction. There were good reasons for not giving the credibility limb of the direction since the appellant had also admitted describing himself in interview as ‘non-violent’ and he admitted acts of dishonesty relating to his financial affairs. In the result, however, the judge neglected to give any direction to the jury in respect of his ‘good’ character. Held Moses LJ recognised that: ‘Even where he has been shown to be guilty of criminal conduct and thus cannot pray in aid absolutely good character, the prima facie rule of practice is to qualify the Vye direction rather than withhold it.’ He recognisedthat the circumstantial case against the appellant was strong and that there was good evidence that, if the offences of anal rape were committed by the appellant, they were conceived by him as a form of physical punishment of his wife. Nevertheless: ‘it is true that the fact he was writing of rape as a punishment, and that his wife alleged that the rape was punishment for her confession to adultery, undermined any reliance that the defendant might place upon his absence of conviction for previous sexual offences. But the fact that the effect of a good character direction might be undermined by the facts of a particular case provides no warrant for declining to give any such direction. There will be many cases where a defendant is entitled to a good character direction but the weight to be given it is diminished by the fact or circumstances of the particular case. There is no principle that a judge is justified in declining to give a good character direction merely because he foresees that the prosecution may be able to diminish its fact. It was for the jury, not the judge, to decide what weight to give the absence of previous convictions.’

Judges:

Moses LJ, Burnett J, Scott-Gall HHJ

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Crim 19, (2012) 176 JP 188, [2012] 1 Cr App R 33, 176 JP 188, [2012] WLR(D) 10

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – GAI v Regina CACD 5-Oct-2012
The defendant’s appeal based on the absence of a good character direction had succeeded. The court now gave its reasons.
Held: After reviewing the authorities, the appeal succeeded: ‘the learned judge was wrong to find that the fact that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.450555

JB v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 24 Jan 2012

‘The principal issue in this appeal by way of case stated from the Youth Court in Birmingham is the nature of the mental element that a prosecutor must prove when a defendant is prosecuted for breach of an Anti-Social Behaviour Order made under s.1(10) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998’

Judges:

Sir John Thomas P QBD, Wyn Williams J

Citations:

[2012] 2 Cr App R 2, (2012) 176 JP 97, [2012] EWHC 72 (Admin), [2012] 1 WLR 2357

Links:

Bailii

Crime

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.450502

Clarke v Regina: CACD 20 Jan 2012

The appellant challenged his conviction of offences committed in the course of an aggravated burglary. The conviction was several years after the offence based upon subsequent improvements in fingerprint recovery techniques.

Judges:

Elias LJ, Eady, MacDuff JJ

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Crim 9

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.450426