Category: Crime

Regina v Norris: CACD 21 Dec 2009

The defendant a nurse, appealed against conviction for the murder of four elderly patients and the attempted murder of another whilst in his care.

Judges:

Aikens LJ, Filed J, Stephens QC HHJ

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Crim 2697

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 13 August 2022; Ref: scu.392907

Dudgeon v The United Kingdom: ECHR 22 Oct 1981

ECHR (Plenary Court) Legislation in Northern Ireland that criminalised homosexual behaviour which was lawful in the rest of the UK.
Held: There was a violation of article 8, but it was not necessary to determine the complaint under article 14, The court acknowledged the necessity in a democratic society for some degree of control to be exercised over homosexual conduct, especially to provide safeguards against the exploitation and corruption of those who are especially vulnerable because they are young. Nevertheless, laws making certain homosexual acts criminal in any event were contrary to the Convention.
Sexual conduct is ‘an essentially private manifestation of the human personality’.
A person’s sexual life was ‘a most intimate aspect’ of private life within the convention. The more intimate the aspects of private life which are being interfered with, the more serious must be the reasons for doing so before the interference can be legitimate.
Judge Matscher, in a dissenting opinion, considered the complaint under article 14, saying: ‘The diversity of internal legislation in a federal state can never, in itself, constitute discrimination, and it is unnecessary to justify it. To claim the contrary would be to mistake totally the very essence of federalism.’

Judges:

R Ryssdal P

Citations:

7525/76, [1981] 4 EHRR 149, [1981] ECHR 5

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Huma Rights 8 14

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Pay v Lancashire Probation Service EAT 29-Oct-2003
The appellant challenged refusal of his claim for unfair dismissal. A probation officer, he had business interests in fire breathing and bondage merchandising which the service said were incompatible with his duties, and dismissed him. He complained . .
Cited – Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd (MGN) (No 1) HL 6-May-2004
The claimant appealed against the denial of her claim that the defendant had infringed her right to respect for her private life. She was a model who had proclaimed publicly that she did not take drugs, but the defendant had published a story . .
See Also – Dudgeon v The United Kingdom ECHR 24-Feb-1983
ECHR Judgment (Just satisfaction) Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses award – Convention proceedings. . .
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 . .
Cited – Mosley v News Group Newspapers Ltd QBD 24-Jul-2008
The defendant published a film showing the claimant involved in sex acts with prostitutes. It characterised them as ‘Nazi’ style. He was the son of a fascist leader, and a chairman of an international sporting body. He denied any nazi element, and . .
Cited – Pearce v Mayfield School CA 31-Jul-2001
The claimant teacher was a lesbian. She complained that her school in failed to protect her against abuse from pupils for her lesbianism. She appealed against a decision that the acts of the pupils did not amount to discrimination, and that the . .
Cited – Goodwin v The United Kingdom ECHR 11-Jul-2002
The claimant was a post operative male to female trans-sexual. She claimed that her human rights were infringed when she was still treated as a man for National Insurance contributions purposes, where she continued to make payments after the age at . .
Cited – AJA and Others v Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis and Others CA 5-Nov-2013
The Court was asked whether the Investigatory Powers Tribunal had the power to investigate whether police officers acrting as undercover agents, and having sexual relations with those they were themselves investigating had infringed the human rights . .
Cited – A and B, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Health SC 14-Jun-2017
The court was asked: ‘Was it unlawful for the Secretary of State for Health, the respondent, who had power to make provisions for the functioning of the National Health Service in England, to have failed to make a provision which would have enabled . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Crime

Updated: 13 August 2022; Ref: scu.164894

Wallis v Bristol Water Plc: Admn 10 Dec 2009

The farmer appealed against a conviction uder the 1999 Regulations saying that the fitting to his water supply pipework in a dairy udder wash were not likely to allow backwash so as to risk contamination of the respondent’s water supply. He said that the magistrates had run together the potential seriousness of any contamination with its likelihood.
Held: The appeal failed: ”likely’ in these regulations is being used in the sense of a real possibility, a possibility that cannot sensibly be ignored having regard to the nature and gravity of the feared harm to public health in the particular case. This interpretation does not offend against any principle of the criminal law. Parkin v Norman does not require that in all penal measures the court must take care to see that ‘likely’ is not treated as if it meant ‘liable’. As the court said in that case, the court’s task is to construe the words of the section in light of the Act as a whole. ‘

Judges:

Dyson LJ, Tugendhat J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 3432 (Admin), [2010] PTSR 1986, [2010] Env LR 16

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Water Supply (Water Fittings) Regulations 1999

Citing:

Cited – Parkin v Norman QBD 1983
The court had to construe the meaning of ‘likely’ in the section reading: ‘Any person who in any public place . . uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour . . with intent to provoke a breach of the peace or whereby a breach of the . .
Cited – In re H and R (Minors) (Child Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof) HL 14-Dec-1995
Evidence allowed – Care Application after Abuse
Children had made allegations of serious sexual abuse against their step-father. He was acquitted at trial, but the local authority went ahead with care proceedings. The parents appealed against a finding that a likely risk to the children had still . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Utilities, Crime, Agriculture

Updated: 11 August 2022; Ref: scu.392657

Thomson v Procurator Fiscal, Peterhead: HCJ 16 Dec 2009

The defendant appealed against her conviction for having her dog dangerously out of control in a public place. She said there had been insufficient evidence to justify the finding. The dog was said to had attacked and bitten another dog, and then gone on to bite another.
Held: The appeal succeeded: ‘it is of no consequence in applying the statutory test that it may have taken eight minutes or more to separate the dogs. It is equally of no consequence that the witnesses found the incident frightening. The fact is that this was one incident at the beginning of which the dog was not dangerously out of control as defined by section 10(3). There is no finding to that effect. The sub-section speaks of ‘any occasion’. One is entitled to ask, on which occasion were there grounds for reasonable apprehension that this dog would injure someone? On the facts found the question is not, in my opinion, answered.’

Judges:

Lady Paton, Sheriff Principal Bowen, Sheriff Principal Lockhart

Citations:

[2009] ScotHC HCJAC – 101

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 3

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

Cited – Normand v Lucas 1993
A lady had fallen in the street and was sitting on a wall when the appellant appeared, along with a small Jack Russell dog. The lady who had fallen encouraged the dog to sit on her knee whilst she was on the wall. She leaned forward and the dog . .
Cited – Tierney v Valentine 1994
A Boxer dog had attacked and bitten two children on a swing in a children’s play park. The court found that the dog which was in the charge of the appellant entered the play area. It was not on a lead. It approached the swings and circled round them . .
Cited – Mcilwaine v Higson, Procurator Fiscal, Airdrie HCJ 29-Sep-2000
A child was chased and mauled by a male Bull Mastiff, Winston, which, along with a female dog of the same breed had run out of the appellant’s house on to a grassy area where children were playing. The appellant had chased after the dogs and managed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 11 August 2022; Ref: scu.392574

Secretary of State for The Home Department v Saadi: Admn 21 Dec 2009

The applicant was subject to a non-derogating control order. He contended that once the improperly admitted evidence was discounted, the respondent could no longer establish reasonable suspicion that he might be involved in terrorist activity.

Judges:

Wilkie J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 3390 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 3(10)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 11 August 2022; Ref: scu.384460

Birmingham City Council, Regina (on the Application of) v Birmingham Crown Court, RR interested Party; similar: Admn 17 Dec 2009

Applicant councils sought to challenge by judicial review leave given to appeal out of time against ASBO orders.
Held: The requests failed. The courts were required when considering such applications to allow for the age of the defendant. The merits of the application were also relevant, with greater merit being required to be shown in cases of longer delay. The relevant criteria for extending time were the merits of the appeal, the reasons for the delay and any prejudice to the respondent.

Judges:

Lord Justice Mackay and Mr Justice Beatson

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 3329 (Admin), Times 05-Jan-2010, [2010] 1 WLR 1287

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Crime and Disorder Act 1998 4(1), Crown Court Rules (SI 1982 No 1109)

Cited by:

Cited – Sherry v The Queen PC 4-Mar-2013
Discretion as to credit for remand time
(Guernsey) In 1980 the appellant had been sentenced to three months imprisonment. He had spent 10 days on remand, but no allowance was given for that time. He gave notice of appeal, but after being released on open remand, he failed to appear at his . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 11 August 2022; Ref: scu.384453

Evans, Regina v: CACD 16 Dec 2009

The appellant appealed against his conviction for serious sexual assaults on his young daughters. He said that he had been denied the opportunity to put to a complainant that she had made other unfounded allegations.

Judges:

Moore-Bick LJ, Griffith Williams J

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Crim 2668

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Sexual Offences Act 2003, Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 11 August 2022; Ref: scu.384150

Hassan v Council and Commission (Common Foreign and Security Policy) C-399/06: ECJ 3 Dec 2009

ECJ Common foreign and security policy (CFSP) – Restrictive measures taken against persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaeda network and the Taliban Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 – Freezing of the funds and economic resources of a person following his inclusion in a list drawn up by a body of the United Nations – Sanctions Committee – Subsequent inclusion in Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 – Action for annulment – Fundamental rights – Right to respect for property, right to be heard and right to effective judicial review.

Citations:

C-399/06, [2009] EUECJ C-399/06

Links:

Bailii

European, Crime

Updated: 11 August 2022; Ref: scu.384100

The King Against Tindall And Others: 12 Jan 1837

Indictment for a nuisance, by erecting and continuing piles and planking in a harbour, and thereby obstructing it and rendering it insecure. Special verdict, that, by the defendant’s works, the harbour is in some extreme cases rendered less secure. Held, that the defendant was not responsible criminally for consequences so slight, uncertain, and rare, and that a verdict of not guilty must be entered.

Citations:

[1837] EngR 371, (1837) 6 Ad and E 143, (1837) 112 ER 55

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 11 August 2022; Ref: scu.313488

Manley and Another v New Forest District Council: Admn 6 Nov 2007

The defendants appealed by way of case stated against their convictions for noise nuisance for their husky kennels – ‘Howling Dog Kennels’. They said that it was impractical, both for animal welfare and cost reasons further to limit the noise.
Held: It was for the defendants to have shown that the best practicable means were in force at the time of the issue of the notice. The appeal was on the facts alone and failed.

Judges:

Moses LJ, Jackson J

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 3188 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Environmental Protection Act 1990 79 80, Statutory Nuisance (Appeals) Regulations 1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Saddleworth Urban District Council v Aggregate and Sand Ltd 1970
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Environment

Updated: 09 August 2022; Ref: scu.271178

OH (Serbia) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 30 Apr 2008

Wilson LJ considered N (Kenya) and said: ‘Primary responsibility for the public interest, whose view of it is likely to be wide and better informed than that of a tribunal, resides in the respondent and accordingly a tribunal hearing an appeal against a decision to deport should not only consider for itself all the facets of the public interest but should weigh, as a linked but independent feature, the approach to them adopted by the respondent in the context of the facts of the case. Speaking for myself, I would not however describe the tribunal’s duty in this regard as being higher than ‘to weigh’ this feature.’
‘A further important facet [of the public interest in deportation] is the role of a deportation order as an expression of society’s revulsion at serious crimes and in building public confidence in the treatment of foreign citizens who have committed serious crimes.’

Judges:

Wilson LJ

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 694, [2009] INLR 109

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – N (Kenya) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 5-Aug-2004
The appellant a foreign national, had been convicted of very serious sex offences, and as his sentence came to an end was ordered to be deported. He appealed saying this infringed his right to a family life.
Held: The court had to balance the . .
Leave – OH (Serbia and Montenegro) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 5-Dec-2007
Renewed application for permission to appeal . .

Cited by:

Cited – Secretary of State for The Home Department v HK (Turkey) CA 27-May-2010
The SS appealed against the successful appeal by the respondent against a deportation order. He had come to England in 1994, been granted indefinite leave to stay, and made a family here. In 2007 he was convicted of grievous bodily harm.
Held: . .
Cited – Hesham Ali (Iraq) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 16-Nov-2016
The appellant, an Iraqi national had arrived in 2000 as a child, and stayed unlawfully after failure of his asylum claim. He was convicted twice of drugs offences. On release he was considered a low risk of re-offending. He had been in a serious . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Crime

Updated: 09 August 2022; Ref: scu.270367

Regina v Mayling: 1963

To establish the offence of outraging public decency, it is not necessary to prove that any particular person was outraged.

Citations:

[1963] 2 QB 717, [1963] 47 Cr App R 102

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Ching Choi CACD 7-May-1999
The defendant appealed his six convictions for outraging public decency. He had used a video camera and mirrors to record images of women using the toilet in a chinese supermarket. . .
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 – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 09 August 2022; Ref: scu.239593

Formhals, Regina v: CACD 21 Nov 2013

Appeal from convictions for assorted dishonesty offences, saying that certain acquittals showed inconsistency with the convictions.

Citations:

[2013] EWCA Crim 2624, [2014] 1 Cr App R 35, [2014] 1 WLR 2219

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.535472

Secretary of State for The Home Department, Regina (on The Application of) v BC and Another: Admn 11 Nov 2009

The applicants were subject to control orders. They were ‘light touch’, not involving a deprivation of liberty.

Judges:

Collins J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 2927 (Admin), [2010] 1 WLR 1542, [2010] UKHRR 344

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6

Cited by:

Cited – King, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice CA 27-Mar-2012
In each case the prisoners challenged their transfer to cellular confinement or segregation within prison or YOI, saying that the transfers infringed their rights under Article 6, saying that domestic law, either in itself or in conjunction with . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Crime

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.381478

Ahmed and Another v Regina: CACD 25 Feb 2011

Judges:

Lord Justice Hughes Vice President of the Court of Appeal
Criminal Division
Mr Justice Owen
And
Mrs Justice Thirlwall DBE

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Crim 184, [2011] Crim LR 734

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Elgizouli v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 25-Mar-2020
Defendants were to face trial in the US, accused of monstrous crimes. The appellant challenged the release of information to the USA by the respondent to support such prosecutions when the death penalty was a possible outcome of a conviction: ‘The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.430094

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 prosecutions of those who are alleged to have assisted a suicide is lawful. ‘
Held: The first appeal (of Nicklinson) failed (Majority seven to to two) The question of whether the current law on assisted suicide is incompatible with Article 8 lies within the United Kingdom’s margin of appreciation, and is therefore a question for the United Kingdom to decide, and the court did have the constitutional authority to make a declaration of incompatibility of section 2 of the 1961 Act with those article 8 rights. However the issues were inherently ones far better to be decided by Parliament, and Parliament’s assessment should be respected.
In the second appeal, the DPP succeeded in having the decision in favour of AM reversed. Several factors, the judgment by the DPP, the variety of cases, and the need to vary the weight to be attached to them according to the circumstances of each individual case were all proper and constitutionally necessary features of the system of prosecution in the public interest.
Lord Neuberger PSC succinctly described the responsibility of the DPP: ‘The DPP always has the right to decide that it is not in the public interest to prosecute, even where it is clear that an offence was committed; and the DPP has power to stay a private prosecution if satisfied, inter alia, that it is not in the public interest for the prosecution to proceed. All that section 2(4) does, therefore, is to rule out the bringing of a private prosecution for encouraging or assisting a suicide without the DPP’s prior consent (although it is worth noting that, before the creation of the Crown Prosecution Service (‘CPS’), it would have prevented the police prosecuting without the consent of the DPP).’
Lord Neuberger also said: ‘Where the legislature has enacted a statutory provision which is within the margin of appreciation accorded to member states, it would be wrong in principle and contrary to the approach adopted in In re G, for a national court to frank the provision as a matter of course simply because it is rational. However, where the provision enacted by Parliament is both rational and within the margin of appreciation accorded by the Strasbourg court, a court in the United Kingdom would normally be very cautious before deciding that it infringes a Convention right. As Lord Mance said in In re G, the extent to which a United Kingdom court should be prepared to entertain holding that such legislation is incompatible must depend on all the circumstances, including the nature of the subject-matter, and the extent to which the legislature or judiciary could claim particular expertise or competence.’

Judges:

Lord Neuberger, President, Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Mance, Lord Kerr, Lord Clarke, Lord Wilson, Lord Sumption, Lord Reed, Lord Hughes

Citations:

36 BHRC 465, [2015] 1 AC 657, 139 BMLR 1, [2014] WLR(D) 298, [2014] 3 FCR 1, [2014] HRLR 17, [2014] 3 WLR 200, [2014] 3 All ER 843, (2014) 139 BMLR 1, UKSC 2013/0235, [2014] UKSC 38, [2014] 3 WLR 200

Links:

WLRD, SC, SC Summary, Bailii Summary, Bailii

Statutes:

Homicide Act 1957, Suicide Act 1961 2, Coroners and Justice Act 2009, European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

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.
At Admin – 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 . .
Appeal from – 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 . .
Cited – Rex v Croft CCA 1944
A person who was present at the suicide of another and who assisted or encouraged the suicide, is guilty of murder as a principal in the second degree. The survivor of a suicide pact was properly convicted of murder. The court considered liability . .
Cited – Airedale NHS Trust v Bland HL 4-Feb-1993
Procedures on Withdrawal of Life Support Treatment
The patient had been severely injured in the Hillsborough disaster, and had come to be in a persistent vegetative state (PVS). The doctors sought permission to withdraw medical treatment. The Official Solicitor appealed against an order of the Court . .
Cited – Inglis, Regina v CACD 12-Nov-2010
The appellant was mother of the victim. He had suffered catastrophic injuries. She had tried to end his life in a ‘mercy killing’, but was discovered, charged with attempted murder, and released on bail. On a second occasion she injected him with a . .
Cited – Aintree University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v James SC 30-Oct-2013
The hospital where a gravely ill man had been treated had asked for a declaration that it would be in his best interests to withhold certain life-sustaining treatments from him. When can it be in the best interests of a living patient to withhold . .
Cited – In Re B (A Minor) (Wardship: Medical Treatment) CA 1981
The child was born with Down’s Syndrome and an intestinal blockage. She needed the obstruction to be relieved if she was to survive. If the operation were performed, the child might die within a few months but it was probable that her life . .
Cited – In re F (Mental Patient: Sterilisation) HL 4-May-1989
Where a patient lacks capacity, there is the power to provide him with whatever treatment or care is necessary in his own best interests. Medical treatment can be undertaken in an emergency even if, through a lack of capacity, no consent had been . .
Cited – In re J (a Minor) (Wardship: Medical treatment) CA 1-Oct-1990
J was born at 27 weeks’, weighing only 1.1kg. He suffered very severe and permanent brain damage at the time of his birth, the brain tissue then lost being irreplaceable. He was epileptic and the medical evidence was that he was likely to develop . .
Cited – Ms B v An NHS Hospital Trust FD 22-Mar-2002
The applicant had come to suffer from a completely disabling condition, and requested that her life support machine be turned off. She did not want to live on a ventilator, and had made a living will. She was found at first to have capacity to make . .
Cited – In re B (Consent to treatment: Capacity) FD 22-Mar-2002
The claimant had suffered catastrophic injuries, leaving her unable to breathe without artificial help. She eventually decided that she wanted to refuse treatment. The health authority took this as an indication of lack of capacity, and refused to . .
Cited – In Re A (Minors) (Conjoined Twins: Medical Treatment); aka In re A (Children) (Conjoined Twins: Surgical Separation) CA 22-Sep-2000
Twins were conjoined (Siamese). Medically, both could not survive, and one was dependent upon the vital organs of the other. Doctors applied for permission to separate the twins which would be followed by the inevitable death of one of them. The . .
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 – In re B (Consent to treatment: Capacity) FD 22-Mar-2002
The claimant had suffered catastrophic injuries, leaving her unable to breathe without artificial help. She eventually decided that she wanted to refuse treatment. The health authority took this as an indication of lack of capacity, and refused to . .
Cited – Koch v Germany ECHR 19-Jul-2012
Article 8-1
Respect for private life
Refusal by the German courts to examine the merits of an application by a man whose wife had just committed suicide in Switzerland after having attempted unsuccessfully to obtain authorisation to . .
Cited – Gross v Switzerland ECHR 14-May-2013
gross_switzerlandECHR2013
ECHR Article 8
Positive obligations
Article 8-1
Respect for private life
Lack of clear legal guidelines regulating the prescription of a drug to enable individual not suffering from a . .
Cited – Hasan and Chaush v Bulgaria ECHR 26-Oct-2000
The Grand Chamber considered executive interference in the appointment of the Chief Mufti of the Bulgarian Muslims: ‘Where the organisation of the religious community is at issue, Article 9 must be interpreted in the light of Article 11 of the . .
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 – Hirst v United Kingdom (2) ECHR 6-Oct-2005
(Grand Chamber) The applicant said that whilst a prisoner he had been banned from voting. The UK operated with minimal exceptions, a blanket ban on prisoners voting.
Held: Voting is a right not a privilege. It was a right central in a . .
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 . .
Cited – Regina v Howe etc HL 19-Feb-1986
The defendants appealed against their convictions for murder, saying that their defences of duress had been wrongly disallowed.
Held: Duress is not a defence available on a charge of murder. When a defence of duress is raised, the test is . .
Cited – Airedale NHS Trust v Bland CA 9-Dec-1992
The official Solicitor appealed against a decision that doctors could withdraw medical treatment including artificial nutrition, from a patient in persistent vegetative state.
Held: The doctors sought permission to act in accordance with . .
Cited – Woolwich Equitable Building Society v Inland Revenue Commissioners (2) HL 20-Jul-1992
The society had set out to assert that regulations were unlawful in creating a double taxation. It paid money on account of the tax demanded. It won and recovered the sums paid, but the revenue refused to pay any interest accrued on the sums paid. . .
Cited – Rodriguez v Attorney General of Canada 30-Sep-1993
Canlii (Supreme Court of Canada) Constitutional law – Charter of Rights – Life, liberty and security of the person – Fundamental justice – Terminally ill patient seeking assistance to commit suicide – Whether . .
Cited – Buckley v The United Kingdom ECHR 25-Sep-1996
The Commission had concluded, by a narrow majority, that the measures taken by the respondent in refusing planning permission and enforcing planning orders were excessive and disproportionate, even allowing a margin of appreciation enjoyed by the . .
Cited – Bellinger v Bellinger HL 10-Apr-2003
Transgender Male to Female not to marry as Female
The parties had gone through a form of marriage, but Mrs B had previously undergone gender re-assignment surgery. Section 11(c) of the 1973 Act required a marriage to be between a male and a female. It was argued that the section was incompatible . .
Cited – Regina v Kennedy HL 17-Oct-2007
The defendant had been convicted of manslaughter. He had supplied a class A drug to a friend who then died taking it. The House was asked ‘When is it appropriate to find someone guilty of manslaughter where that person has been involved in the . .
Cited – Countryside Alliance and others, Regina (on the Application of) v Attorney General and Another HL 28-Nov-2007
The appellants said that the 2004 Act infringed their rights under articles 8 11 and 14 and Art 1 of protocol 1.
Held: Article 8 protected the right to private and family life. Its purpose was to protect individuals from unjustified intrusion . .
Cited – In re P and Others, (Adoption: Unmarried couple) (Northern Ireland); In re G HL 18-Jun-2008
The applicants complained that as an unmarried couple they had been excluded from consideration as adopters.
Held: Northern Ireland legislation had not moved in the same way as it had for other jurisdictions within the UK. The greater . .
Cited – Greens v The United Kingdom ECHR 23-Nov-2010
The applicants alleged a violation of article 3 in the refusal to allow them to enrol on the electoral register whilst serving prison sentences.
Held: Where one of its judgments raises issues of general public importance and sensitivity, in . .
Cited – Sinclair Collis Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Health CA 17-Jun-2011
The claimants sought to challenge the validity of rules brought in under the 2009 Act as to the placement of cigarette vending machines in retail outlets. They said it was a a national measure restricting the free movement of goods. The . .
Cited – A, B And C v Ireland ECHR 16-Dec-2010
Grand Chamber – The Court considered the prohibition of abortion in Ireland: ‘The first two applicants principally complained under Article 8 about, inter alia, the prohibition of abortion for health and well-being reasons in Ireland and the third . .
Cited – Haas v Switzerland ECHR 20-Jan-2011
The applicant was severely bipolar, and wanted to obtain a lethal dose of a drug to kill himself, but could not do so, because Swiss law required him to get a prescription, and, before he could do that, he needed a psychiatric assessment. Relying on . .
Cited – Lautsi v Italy ECHR 18-Mar-2011
(Grand Chamber) The applicants complained that the presence in all state schoolrooms of a crucifix on the wall infringed the principle of secularism. The routine presence in state school classrooms of a crucifix, which was not used for worship, . .
Cited – AXA General Insurance Ltd and Others v Lord Advocate and Others SC 12-Oct-2011
Standing to Claim under A1P1 ECHR
The appellants had written employers’ liability insurance policies. They appealed against rejection of their challenge to the 2009 Act which provided that asymptomatic pleural plaques, pleural thickening and asbestosis should constitute actionable . .
Cited – Quila and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 12-Oct-2011
Parties challenged the rule allowing the respondent to deny the right to enter or remain here to non EU citizens marrying a person settled and present here where either party was under the age of 21. The aim of the rule was to deter forced . .
Cited – Abdullah Yasa And Others v Turkey ECHR 16-Jul-2013
Article 3
Degrading treatment
Inhuman treatment
Serious injury to nose caused by tear gas canister fired by police officer: violation
Article 46
Article 46-2
Execution of judgment
Measures of a general . .
Cited – Sidaway v Board of Governors of the Bethlem Royal Hospital and the Maudsley Hospital HL 21-Feb-1985
Explanation of Medical Risks essential
The plaintiff alleged negligence in the failure by a surgeon to disclose or explain to her the risks inherent in the operation which he had advised.
Held: The appeal failed. A mentally competent patient has an absolute right to refuse to . .
Cited – Weber and Saravia v Germany ECHR 29-Jun-2006
(Admissibility) ‘The first applicant is a freelance journalist who works for various German and foreign newspapers, radio and television stations on a regular basis. In particular, she investigates matters that are subject to the surveillance of the . .
Cited – Huang v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 21-Mar-2007
Appellate Roles – Human Rights – Families Split
The House considered the decision making role of immigration appellate authorities when deciding appeals on Human Rights grounds, against refusal of leave to enter or remain, under section 65. In each case the asylum applicant had had his own . .
Cited – Gillan and Quinton v The United Kingdom ECHR 12-Jan-2010
The claimants had been stopped by the police using powers in the 2000 Act. They were going to a demonstration outside an arms convention. There was no reason given for any suspicion that the searches were needed.
Held: The powers given to the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Recovery of Medical Costs for Asbestos Diseases (Wales) Bill (Reference By The Counsel General for Wales) SC 9-Feb-2015
The court was asked whether the Bill was within the competence of the Welsh Assembly. The Bill purported to impose NHS charges on those from whom asbestos related damages were recovered.
Held: The Bill fell outside the legislative competence . .
At SC – 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. . .
At HL – Nicklinson and Lamb v The United Kingdom ECHR 23-Jun-2015
ECHR Article 8-1
Respect for private life
Ban on assisted suicide and voluntary euthanasia: inadmissible
Facts – The first applicant is the wife of Tony Nicklinson, now deceased, who suffered . .
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 . .
Cited – Gaughran v Chief Constable of The Police Service of Northern Ireland (Northern Ireland) SC 13-May-2015
The court was asked as to to the right of the Police Service of Northern Ireland to retain personal information and data lawfully obtained from the appellant following his arrest for the offence of driving with excess alcohol.
Held: The appeal . .
Cited – Human Rights Commission for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland : Abortion) SC 7-Jun-2018
The Commission challenged the compatibility of the NI law relating to banning nearly all abortions with Human Rights Law. It now challenged a decision that it did not have standing to bring the case.
Held: (Lady Hale, Lord Kerr and Lord Wilson . .
Cited – DA and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions SC 15-May-2019
Several lone parents challenged the benefits cap, saying that it was discriminatory.
Held: (Hale, Kerr LL dissenting) The parents’ appeals failed. The legislation had a clear impact on lone parents and their children. The intention was to . .
Cited – Tigere, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills SC 29-Jul-2015
After increasing university fees, the student loan system was part funded by the government. They introduced limits to the availability of such loans, and a student must have been lawfully ordinarily resident in the UK for three years before the day . .
Cited – Elgizouli v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 25-Mar-2020
Defendants were to face trial in the US, accused of monstrous crimes. The appellant challenged the release of information to the USA by the respondent to support such prosecutions when the death penalty was a possible outcome of a conviction: ‘The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Crime, Human Rights

Leading Case

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.527183

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 is faced when seeking to deal with serious crime. It must be remembered that questions of policy remain primarily the responsibility of the legislature. It would not assist the individuals who are charged with offences if, because of the approach adopted to ‘statutory defences’ by the courts, the legislature, in order to avoid the risk of legislation being successfully challenged, did not include in the legislation a statutory defence to a charge.
Lord Woolf set down a test for when a reverse of the burden of proof would be acceptable: ‘Whether they are justifiable will in the end depend upon whether it remains primarily the responsibility of the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused to the required standard and whether the exception is reasonably imposed, notwithstanding the importance of maintaining the principle [of the presumption of innocence] . . If the exception requires certain matters to be presumed until the contrary is shown, then it will be difficult to justify that presumption unless, as was pointed out by the United States Supreme Court in Leary v United States [1969] 23 L Ed 2d 57, 82, ‘it can be at least said with substantial assurance that the presumed fact is more likely than not to flow from the proved fact on which it is made to depend.’

Judges:

Lord Woolf

Citations:

[1993] AC 951

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Drummond v Regina CACD 7-Mar-2002
The appellant had been convicted of causing death by careless driving with excess alcohol. He said that he had taken alcohol after stopping driving but before being tested. He challenged the weight of the burden of proof ascribed by the statute. The . .
Cited – Regina v Johnstone HL 22-May-2003
The defendant was convicted under the 1994 Act of producing counterfeit CDs. He argued that the affixing of the name of the artist to the CD was not a trade mark use, and that the prosecution had first to establish a civil offence before his act . .
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 – Webster v Regina CACD 1-Dec-2010
The defendant appealed against his conviction under the 1889 Act for making a corrupt gift to a local government officer. He said that the 1916 Act placed an unfair burden on him to prove that the gift was not corruptly given.
Held: The appeal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.180563

Rex v Lord Rusby: 1800

The common law, in being formed from time to time by the wisdom of man it grew and increased from time to time with the wisdom of mankind.
Lord Kenyon said: ‘The common law, though not to be found in the written records of the realm, yet has been long well known. It is coeval with civilised society itself, and was formed from time to time by the wisdom of man. Good sense did not come with the Conquest, or at any other one time, but grew and increased from time to time with the wisdom of mankind.’

Judges:

Lord Kenyon

Citations:

(1800) Pea (2) 189

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – A and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department (No 2) HL 8-Dec-2005
Evidence from 3rd Party Torture Inadmissible
The applicants had been detained following the issue of certificates issued by the respondent that they posed a terrorist threat. They challenged the decisions of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission saying that evidence underlying the . .
Cited – Elgizouli v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 25-Mar-2020
Defendants were to face trial in the US, accused of monstrous crimes. The appellant challenged the release of information to the USA by the respondent to support such prosecutions when the death penalty was a possible outcome of a conviction: ‘The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Constitutional

Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.235924

MB, Re, Secretary of State for the Home Department v MB: Admn 12 Apr 2006

The applicant challenged the terms of a non-derogating control order. It was anticipated that unless prevented, he would fight against UK forces in Iraq.
Held: The section allowed the Secretary of State to impose any necessary conditions, but subject to a system of supervision by the courts. The parties now disputed whether the Act gave the applicant an opportuinity to receive a fair hearing. These were civil proceedings, not criminal. The system created did not allow to the courts any proper opportunity to give the subject a fair hearing: ‘Not merely does the Secretary of State have to meet a very low standard of proof whilst being able to deploy the whole of his case, including evidence that would otherwise be inadmissible, the procedure enables to the Secretary of State to place a significant part, and in some cases the significant part of his case, before the court in the absence of the respondent and his legal representatives.’ and ‘In the present case it has not been possible to provide the respondent with even a summary of the closed material. . . The basis for the Security Service’s confidence is wholly contained within the closed material. Without access to that material it is difficult to see how, in reality, the respondent could make any effective challenge to what is, on the open case before him, no more than a bare assertion. ‘
‘Considered individually, features (1) to (6) of the procedure under the Act would not necessarily render the process as a whole unfair for the purposes of Article 6.1. However, it is the combination and cumulative effect of all of these features which is unique and which results in a procedure which is uniquely unfair. The issue can be tested in this way. On the assumption that the court at a hearing under section 3(10) could be persuaded to consider material coming into existence after the decisions under challenge, including the respondent’s answers to the open material and the Special Advocate’s submissions in respect of the closed material, what would be the position if the court, having considered all of the material as at the date of the hearing concluded that:
(a) there was now no reasonable basis for suspecting that the controlee had been involved in terrorism- related activity, or even that, on the balance of probabilities, he had not been so involved, and/or
(b) the control order or all or some of the obligations imposed by it were not necessary for purposes connected with protecting members of the public from a risk of terrorism.
If the Secretary of State’s original decision was not legally flawed upon the basis of the information then available to him, these conclusions would not enable the court to quash the order. It would still be under a duty to ‘decide that the control order is to continue in force’: see subsections 3(12) and (13) above. Such an outcome would be an affront to justice. In the absence of a merits review at the section 3(10) stage, the overall procedure is manifestly ineffective and unfair.’ and
‘I am unable to envisage any circumstances in which, realistically, it would have been possible for the court to conclude that the Secretary of State’s decisions on or about 1st September 2005 were legally flawed upon the basis of the one-sided information then available to him. It follows that I must decide that the control order is to continue in force. However, for the reasons set out above, I am satisfied that the procedures under section 3 of the Act relating to the supervision of the court of non-derogating control orders made by the Secretary of State are incompatible with the respondent’s right to a fair hearing under Article 6.1, and I will make a declaration of incompatibility to that effect under section 4 of the 1998 Act. ‘

Judges:

Sullivan J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 1000 (Admin), [2006] HRLR 878

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 3, Terrorism Act 2000 81, Human Rights Act 1998, European Convention on Human Rights 6.1 88

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Clingham (formerly C (a minor)) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea; Regina v Crown Court at Manchester Ex parte McCann and Others HL 17-Oct-2002
The applicants had been made subject of anti-social behaviour orders. They challenged the basis upon which the orders had been made.
Held: The orders had no identifiable consequences which would make the process a criminal one. Civil standards . .
Cited – A, X and Y, and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 25-Oct-2002
The applicant challenged regulations brought in by the respondent providing for foreigners suspected of terrorism to be detained where a British national suspect would not have been detained. The respondent had issued a derogation from the . .
Cited – Engel And Others v The Netherlands (1) ECHR 8-Jun-1976
The court was asked whether proceedings in a military court against soldiers for disciplinary offences involved criminal charges within the meaning of Article 6(1): ‘In this connection, it is first necessary to know whether the provision(s) defining . .
Cited – In re S (Minors) (Care Order: Implementation of Care Plan) HL 14-Mar-2002
Section 3(1) of the 1998 Act is not available where the suggested interpretation is contrary to express statutory words or is by implication necessarily contradicted by the statute. The judge’s task is to interpret, not to legislate. The proposed . .
Cited – Bryan v The United Kingdom ECHR 22-Nov-1995
Bryan was a farmer at Warrington in Cheshire. He built two brick buildings on land in a conservation area without planning permission and the planning authority served an enforcement notice for their demolition. He appealed on grounds (a) (that . .
Cited – Zumtobel v Austria ECHR 21-Sep-1993
The Zumtobel partnership objected to the compulsory purchase of their farming land to build the L52 by-pass road in the Austrian Vorarlberg. The appropriate Government committee heard their objections but confirmed the order. They appealed to an . .
Cited – Runa Begum v London Borough of Tower Hamlets (First Secretary of State intervening) HL 13-Feb-2003
The appellant challenged the procedure for reviewing a decision made as to the suitability of accomodation offered to her after the respondent had accepted her as being homeless. The procedure involved a review by an officer of the council, with an . .
Cited – O’Hara v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary HL 21-Nov-1996
Second Hand Knowledge Supports Resaobnable Belief
The plaintiff had been arrested on the basis of the 1984 Act. The officer had no particular knowledge of the plaintiff’s involvement, relying on a briefing which led to the arrest.
Held: A reasonable suspicion upon which an arrest was founded . .
Cited – Roberts v Parole Board HL 7-Jul-2005
Balancing Rights of Prisoner and Society
The appellant had been convicted of the murder of three police officers in 1966. His tariff of thirty years had now long expired. He complained that material put before the Parole Board reviewing has case had not been disclosed to him.
Held: . .
Cited – Regina (Daly) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 23-May-2001
A prison policy requiring prisoners not to be present when their property was searched and their mail was examined was unlawful. The policy had been introduced after failures in search procedures where officers had been intimidated by the presence . .

Cited by:

Cited – Secretary of State for the Home Department v JJ and others Admn 28-Jun-2006
The claimants challenged the terms of restrictions placed upon them under the Act. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Human Rights

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.241650

Hanway v Boultbee: 30 Nov 1830

A person may use a proportionate degree of force to defend himself, or others, from attack or the threat of imminent attack, or to defend his property or the property of others in the same circumstances.

Citations:

[1830] 1 M and Rob 15, [1830] EngR 887, (1830) 4 Car and P 350, (1830) 172 ER 735 (B), [1830] EngR 888, (1830) 174 ER 6

Links:

Commonlii, Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Bayer, Hart, Snook, and Whistance Admn 4-Nov-2003
The defendants protested the growing of genetically modified crops. The prosecutor appealed dismissal of charges of aggravated trespass for them having entered a crop and attached themselves to tractors. The district judge decided they had genuine . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Torts – Other, Crime

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.187494

Ilott v Wilkes: 1820

Citations:

(1820) 3 B and Ald 304

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – British Railways Board v Herrington HL 16-Feb-1972
Land-owner’s Possible Duty to Trespassers
The plaintiff, a child had gone through a fence onto the railway line, and been badly injured. The Board knew of the broken fence, but argued that they owed no duty to a trespasser.
Held: Whilst a land-owner owes no general duty of care to a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Negligence

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.182883

Vigon v Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 9 Dec 1997

Using a hidden video camera, passively to film women in changing rooms, was an act of the camera owner, and constituted the insulting behaviour offence.

Citations:

Times 09-Dec-1997, [1998] 162 JPR 115

Statutes:

Public Order Act 1986 5

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Percy v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 21-Dec-2001
The defendant had been convicted of using words or behaviour likely to cause harassment alarm or distress, when she defaced the US flag, and stood on it before a US military officer. She said that the defacing of flags was a common form of protest, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.90164

Vasquez v The Queen; O’Neil v The Queen: PC 26 Oct 1994

(Belize) The burden of proof on provocation in a murder case remained with the prosecution despite the constitution. The Belize Criminal Code imposed no more than an evidential burden on the accused: ‘In their Lordships’ view section 116(a) of the Code, by placing the burden of proof of provocation upon an accused, is in conflict with section 6(3)(a) of the Constitution and must accordingly be modified to conform therewith. Their Lordships consider that section 116(a) should be construed as though the prefatory words of the section read: ‘A person who intentionally causes the death of another person by unlawful harm shall be deemed to be guilty only of manslaughter, and not of murder, if there is such evidence as raised a reasonable doubt as to whether he was deprived of the power of self-control by such extreme provocation given by the other person as is mentioned in section 117;’ and that the prefatory words of section 119 (1) should be construed as though they read: ‘Notwithstanding the existence of such evidence as is referred to in section 116(a) the crime of the accused shall not be deemed to be thereby reduced to manslaughter if it appear, either from the evidence given on his behalf, or from evidence given on the part of the prosecution . . ‘ It follows that the trial judge misdirected the jury on onus of proof and the conviction for murder must be quashed.’ A judge need not be astute to conjure up hypothetical situations in which provocation could conceivably have arisen if the issue is not directly raised in evidence. He should only direct the jury on provocation if there is evidence before the court which, if believed, might be taken by a reasonable jury to support this defence.

Judges:

Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle

Citations:

Gazette 26-Oct-1994, [1994] 1 WLR 1304, [1994] 3 All ER 674

Statutes:

Belize Criminal Code 115 to 119

Jurisdiction:

Commonwealth

Cited by:

Cited – Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza HL 21-Jun-2004
Same Sex Partner Entitled to tenancy Succession
The protected tenant had died. His same-sex partner sought a statutory inheritance of the tenancy.
Held: His appeal succeeded. The Fitzpatrick case referred to the position before the 1998 Act: ‘Discriminatory law undermines the rule of law . .
Cited – Michael Yearwood v The Queen PC 26-Jun-2001
PC (Grenada) The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder. He claimed a misdirection on provocation.
Held: The judge’s direction had been over elaborate, and gave too much weight to the old law. . .
Cited – Browne v The Queen PC 6-May-1999
(St Christopher and Nevis) The appellant had been convicted of murder whilst still a youth. He had accordingly been sentenced to be detained ‘during [the Governor-General’s] pleasure; and if so sentenced he shall be liable to be detained in such . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Commonwealth

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.90128

Copeland, Regina v: SC 11 Mar 2020

The Court was asked whether under the 1883 Act: for the purposes of section 4(1) can personal experimentation or own private education, absent some ulterior unlawful purpose, be regarded as a lawful object? The defendant, a young man on the autistic spectrum, had collected explosive materials expressing an interest in them for experiments. The Court of Appeal said it was bound by Riding to find that this was not a lawful object. Held (Lord Lloyd-Jones and Lord Hamblen dissenting) The appeal succeeded. Legislation had been drawn with the expectation that private hobbyists may manufacture and keep explosives for their own private use. Experimentation was a lawful object within the section.

Judges:

Lord Reed, President, Lord Carnwath, Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lord Sales, Lord Hamblen

Citations:

[2020] UKSC 8, [2020] WLR(D) 148, [2021] AC 815, [2020] Crim LR 645, [2020] 4 All ER 173, [2020] 2 Cr App R 4, [2020] 2 WLR 681, UKSC 2019/0089

Links:

Bailii, WLRD, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary, SC Video Summary, SC 27 Jan 2020 am Video, SC 27 Jan 2020 pm Video

Statutes:

Explosive Substances Act 1883 4(1), Explosives Regulations 2014

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Distinguished – Riding, Regina v CACD 7-Apr-2009
Appeal from conviction under the 1883 Act – that the judge was wrong to hold that the reverse onus placed on a defendant by section 4 in relation to a defence of lawful object was a legal rather than an evidential onus; and that the judge was wrong . .
Cited – Regina v Fegan CANI 1984
The appellant was a young Roman Catholic man married to a Protestant woman, who by reason of his religion was subjected to threats of serious violence in the Protestant area in which he lived and told to move out of the district. The appellant . .
Cited – Attorney-General’s Reference (No 2 of 1983) CACD 3-Feb-1984
The defendant, a shop-keeper, found his shop to be in the middle of serious rioting. His shop had been damaged badly and he suffered looting. Fearing further attacks he stayed in his shop, making 10 petrol bombs for protection.
Held: A . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.649465

Attorney-General’s Reference (No 2 of 1983): CACD 3 Feb 1984

The defendant, a shop-keeper, found his shop to be in the middle of serious rioting. His shop had been damaged badly and he suffered looting. Fearing further attacks he stayed in his shop, making 10 petrol bombs for protection.
Held: A defendant might set up the statutory defence of showing that he possessed an explosive substance ‘for a lawful purpose’ if he could establish on the balance of probabilities that his purpose was to protect himself or his family or property by way of self-defence against an imminent and apprehended attack by means which he believed to be no more than reasonably necessary to meet the attack.
Lord Lane CJ said: ‘The defendant in this case said that his intentions were to use the petrol bombs purely to protect his premises should any rioters come to his shop. It was accordingly open to the jury to find that the defendant had made them for the reasonable protection of himself and his property against this danger. The fact that in manufacturing and storing the petrol bombs the defendant committed offences under the Act of 1875 did not necessarily involve that when he made them his object in doing so was not lawful. The means by which he sought to fulfil that object were unlawful, but the fact that he could never without committing offences reach the point where he used them in self-defence did not render his object in making them for that purpose unlawful. The object or purpose or end for which the petrol bombs were made was not itself rendered unlawful by the fact that it could not be fulfilled except by unlawful means. The fact that the commission of other offences was unavoidable did not result in any of them becoming one of the defendant’s objects.
In our judgment a defendant is not left in the paradoxical position of being able to justify acts carried out in self-defence but not acts immediately preparatory to it. There is no warrant for the submission on behalf of the Attorney General that acts of self-defence will only avail a defendant when they have been done spontaneously. There is no question of a person in danger of attack ‘writing his own immunity’ for violent future acts of his. He is not confined for his remedy to calling in the police or boarding up his premises. He may still arm himself for his own protection, if the exigency arises, although in so doing he may commit other offences. That he may be guilty of other offences will avoid the risk of anarchy contemplated by the reference. It is also to be noted that although a person may ‘make’ a petrol bomb with a lawful object, nevertheless if he remains in possession of it after the threat has passed which made his object lawful, it may cease to be so. It will only be very rarely that circumstances will exist where the manufacture or possession of petrol bombs can be for a lawful object.’

Judges:

Lord Lane CJ

Citations:

[1984] 1 All ER 988, [1984] EWCA Crim 1, [1984] QB 456

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Explosive Substances Act 1883 4

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Bayer, Hart, Snook, and Whistance Admn 4-Nov-2003
The defendants protested the growing of genetically modified crops. The prosecutor appealed dismissal of charges of aggravated trespass for them having entered a crop and attached themselves to tractors. The district judge decided they had genuine . .
Cited – Copeland, Regina v SC 11-Mar-2020
The Court was asked whether under the 1883 Act: for the purposes of section 4(1) can personal experimentation or own private education, absent some ulterior unlawful purpose, be regarded as a lawful object? The defendant, a young man on the autistic . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.187498

Ravjani and Others, Regina v: CACD 29 Nov 2012

A number of applications and an appeal relating to proceedings at the centre of which was a charge of conspiracy to cheat the public revenue through a missing trader intra-Community fraud (an MTIC fraud) which was alleged to have resulted in the loss to the public purse of some pounds 100 million by way of repaid VAT.

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Crim 2519

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 05 August 2022; Ref: scu.466408

Hilton, Regina (on The Application of) v Canterbury Crown Court: Admn 21 Oct 2009

Application for judicial review of a decision of the Crown Court to refuse to state a case for the consideration of the High Court, following the rejection by the Crown Court of the claimant’s appeal against conviction and to compel them to do so.

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 2867 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 05 August 2022; Ref: scu.381464

Ethos Recycling Ltd v Barking and Dagenham Magistrates Court: Admn 13 Nov 2009

The company sought judicial review of the deceision by the respondent to issue an abatement notice. It said that under section 79 of the 1990 Act, such a notice fell within the term ‘summary proceedings’ and that therefore the consent of the secretary of State should first have been obtained.
Held: The notice did not require the consent suggested. Historically urgent action was often required, and requiring the consent would go against that. A notice was not itself the commencement of proceedings. Consent would be required when, on a non-compliance, the authority wanted to take the matter forward to the court.

Judges:

Lord Justice Scott Baker and Mr Justice Cranston

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 2885 (Admin), Times 02-Feb-2010

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Environmental Protection Act 1990 79(10)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Environment, Crime

Updated: 05 August 2022; Ref: scu.380331

Patel and Another, Regina v: CACD 12 Nov 2009

The defendants appealed against their convictions of placing on the market a medicinal product without holding an EC or UK marketing authorisation contrary to paragraph 1 of Schedule 3 to the 1994 Regulations. They said that they had not intended the sale of the products with the EEA.
Held: The appeals succeeded. The Regulations could not be read or intended to apply to sales to end users outside the EEA.

Judges:

Lord Justice Hooper, Mr Justice Tomlinson and Mrs Justice Swift

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Crim 2311, Times 18-Nov-2009

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Medicines for Human Use (Marketing Authorisations Etc.) Regulations (SI 1994 No 3144)

Crime

Updated: 05 August 2022; Ref: scu.377890

RSPCA v Johnson: Admn 16 Oct 2009

Appeal by the RSPCA by way of case stated from a decision refusing to hear an information laid by the Society on the basis that it was out of time. The defendant was a horse owner accused of causing suffering in his horse.
Held: Pill LJ said: ‘There is no principle of law that knowledge in a prosecutor begins immediately any employee of that prosecutor has the relevant knowledge and Donnachie does not establish one. It is right that prosecutors are not entitled to shuffle papers between officers or sit on information so as to extend a time limit. There is, however, a degree of judgment involved in bringing a prosecution, and knowledge . . involves an opportunity for those with appropriate skills to consider whether there is sufficient information to justify a prosecution.
It is not disputed that the Society have a department making decisions as to whether to prosecute. That is separate from the role of the investigating officers who obtain information on the ground . . .It is in the public interest that prosecutions are brought only upon a consideration of the evidence by an expert mind . .’

Judges:

Pill LJ, Rafferty J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 2702 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Animal Welfare Act 2006

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Riley and Others v Crown Prosecution Service Admn 18-Oct-2016
The defendants appealed by case stated from convictions under the 2006 Act arising from the treatment of cows including at a slaughterhouse. Arguments were put that the prosecution was time barred.
Held: The court recognsed the limited role of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Animals, Crime

Updated: 05 August 2022; Ref: scu.377565

Regina v Hudson and Taylor: CACD 17 Mar 1971

Two teenage girls committed perjury by failing to identify the defendant. When prosecuted they pleaded duress, on the basis that they had been warned by a group, including a man with a reputation for violence, that if they identified the defendant in court the group would get the girls and cut them up. They resolved to tell lies, and were strengthened in their resolve when they arrived at court and saw the author of the threat in the public gallery. The trial judge ruled that the threats were not sufficiently present and immediate to support the defence of duress.
Held: The Court is willing to entertain the possibility of a defence of duress even in an extreme case if it is arguable that ‘the will of the accused has been overborne by threats of death or serious personal injury so that the commission of the alleged defence was no longer [his] voluntary act’ Although the threats could not be executed in the courtroom they could be carried out in the streets of Salford that same night.

Judges:

Lord Parker CJ, Widgery LJ, Cooke J

Citations:

[1971] 2 QB 202, [1971] EWCA Crim 2, [1971] 2 All ER 244, [1971] 2 WLR 1047, (1971) 56 Cr App Rep 1, (1971) 135 JP 403

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Subramaniam v Director of Public Prosecutions PC 1956
(Malaysia) The defendant sought to advance a defence of duress under a section of the Penal Code of the Federated Malay States which provided that, with certain exceptions, ‘nothing is an offence which is done by a person who is compelled to do it . .

Cited by:

Cited – The Coca-Cola Company and Another v Cengiz Aytacli and others ChD 30-Jan-2003
The claimant having succeeded in an action against the defendants, now sought an order for their committal for contempt, accusing them of having given false evidence, and of having failed to comply with court orders made. The defendant asserted a . .
Cited – In Re A (Minors) (Conjoined Twins: Medical Treatment); aka In re A (Children) (Conjoined Twins: Surgical Separation) CA 22-Sep-2000
Twins were conjoined (Siamese). Medically, both could not survive, and one was dependent upon the vital organs of the other. Doctors applied for permission to separate the twins which would be followed by the inevitable death of one of them. The . .
Cited – Hasan, Regina v HL 17-Mar-2005
The House was asked two questions: the meaning of ‘confession’ for the purposes of section 76(1) of the 1984 Act, and as to the defence of duress. The defendant had been involved in burglary, being told his family would be harmed if he refused. The . .
Cited – Quayle and others v Regina, Attorney General’s Reference (No. 2 of 2004) CACD 27-May-2005
Each defendant appealed against convictions associated variously with the cultivation or possession of cannabis resin. They sought to plead medical necessity. There had been medical recommendations to move cannabis to the list of drugs which might . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 05 August 2022; Ref: scu.181187