Category: Crime

Edgar and Others, Regina v: CACD 19 Jul 2018

Appeal from convictions for murder – possible bias in juror. The family liaison officer working with the family of the deceased had had repeated contact with a juror.
Held: Appeal allowed.

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Crim 1857

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.634827

Warwickshire County Council v Halfords Autocentres Ltd: Admn 9 Nov 2018

Proper interpretation of the 2008 Regulations in the context of a test purchase of goods or services.
Held: ‘a commercial practice for the purposes of article 2(d) of the Directive (and thus regulation 2(1) of the 2008 Regulations) may be constituted by or derived from a test purchase made of a product (including a service) that is generally promoted to and intended for purchase by consumers, even where the purchaser may not himself be a consumer. Specifically, the giving to the test purchaser of an invoice or other document incorporating false information as to a main characteristic of the product (including the execution of a service) that would mislead the average consumer into paying for services that he has not received (which he would not otherwise have done) is a commercial practice which is a misleading action for the purposes of regulations 5 and 9 of the 2008 Regulations, being ‘directly connected with the promotion, sale or supply of a product to . . consumers’.’

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 3007 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime, Consumer, European

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.630573

OP (Jamaica) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 1 May 2008

The applicant had been granted leave to stay. He was convicted of manslaughter and ordered to be deported on release. The Home Secretary appealed an overturning of the AIT decision in his favour, and the applicant in turn now appealed saying there had been no error of law.
Held: Wall LJ said: ‘The point, I think, shortly stated, is this. N (Kenya) makes it clear that proper weight must be given to the Secretary of State’s policy on deportation, and in particular to the fact that she has taken the view, in the public interest that crimes of violence such as that committed by the appellant are sufficiently serious to warrant deportation. In such circumstances, her assessment had to be taken as a given, unless it is palpably wrong. It was, accordingly, at best a questionable operation for the first determination to evaluate the seriousness of the offence

Judges:

Wall LJ

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 440

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 . .

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: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Crime

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.267388

Khan v Royal Air Force Summary Appeal Court: Admn 7 Oct 2004

The defendant claimed that he had gone absent without leave from the RAF as a conscientous objector.
Held: The defendant had not demonstrated by complaint to the RAF that he did object to service in Iraq. In some circumstances where there was no procedure to make his objection known, the failure to do so might be taken account of, but here such a procedure did exist. For article 9, ”law’ (i) must have the status of law, (ii) must be adequately accessible, (iii) must be of sufficient precision to be foreseeable, and (iv) must be compatible with the rule of law. ‘ Although the appellant’s recall papers did not expressly refer to conscientious objection as a ground for claiming exemption, it did sufficiently identify a relevant ground, namely ‘any other grounds . . for compassionate reasons’. Nevertheless there was no relevant manifestation of conscientious objection and no interference with any such manifestation by reason of the appellant’s recall, arrest, prosecution or conviction.

Judges:

Mr Justice Forbes Lord Justice Rix

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 2230 (Admin), Times 28-Oct-2004

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 9.1, Air Force Act 1955, The Reserve Forces (Call Out and Recall) (Exemption Etc) Regulations 1997 (SI 1997 No 307)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Gaygusuz v Austria ECHR 16-Sep-1996
The applicant was a Turkish national resident in Austria. While working there he had paid unemployment insurance contributions. At a stage when he was unemployed he applied for an advance on his pension in the form of emergency assistance. That was . .
Cited – Carson and Reynolds v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 17-Jun-2003
The claimant Reynolds challenged the differential treatment by age of jobseeker’s allowance. Carson complained that as a foreign resident pensioner, her benefits had not been uprated. The questions in each case were whether the benefit affected a . .
Cited – Sepet and Bulbil v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 20-Mar-2003
The appellants sought asylum. They were Kurdish pacifists, and claimed that they would be forced into the armed forces on pain of imprisonment if they were returned to Turkey.
Held: The concept of ‘persecution’ was central. It is necessary to . .
Cited – Thlimmenos v Greece ECHR 6-Apr-2000
(Grand Chamber) The applicant was a Jehovah’s Witness who had been convicted of insubordination under the Military Criminal Code for refusing to wear a military uniform at a time of general mobilisation. He was subsequently refused appointment as a . .
Cited – X v Federal Republic of Germany ECHR 5-Jul-1977
(Commission) A complaint was brought by a Jehovah’s witness who objected not only to military service but also to compulsory civilian substitute service.
Held: The complaint was inadmissible. The Commission referred to article 4(3)(b) and . .
Cited – Leyla Sahin v Turkey ECHR 29-Jun-2004
(Grand Chamber) The applicant had been denied access to written examinations and to a lecture at the University of Istanbul because she was wearing an Islamic headscarf. This was prohibited not only by the rules of the university but also by the . .
Cited – Johansen v Norway ECHR 14-Oct-1985
(Commission) A pacifist objected to civilian substitute service on the ground that it tended to uphold respect for military service.
Held: The complaint was inadmissible. Referring to article 4(3)(b): ‘The Convention does not prevent a state . .
Cited – Regina (Williamson and Others) v Secretary of State for Education and Employment CA 12-Dec-2002
The claimants sought a declaration that the restriction on the infliction of corporal punishment in schools infringed their human right of freedom of religion. The schools concerned were Christian schools who believed that moderate corporal . .
Cited – Kalac v Turkey ECHR 1-Jul-1997
In exercising his freedom to manifest his beliefs an individual ‘may need to take his specific situation into account.’ ‘The Commission recalls that the expression ‘in accordance with the law’, within the meaning of Article 9(2), requires first that . .
Cited – Krotov v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 11-Feb-2004
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Armed Forces, Crime, Human Rights

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.215931

Shaw and Campbell, Regina v: CANI 8 Jun 2001

The defendant appealed his conviction for murder saying the judge should have left the alternative charge of having assisted offenders to the jury.
Held: Referring to Fairbanks: ‘It was argued on behalf of the Crown that this test was not satisfied in the present case, where there was, it was submitted, ample evidence to justify the conviction of Campbell for murder. It seems to us that the test is material where the possible alternative is a relatively trifling offence, consideration of which would only distract the jury. It is clear from the terms of the passage which we have quoted from Mustill LJ’s judgment in R v Fairbanks that other considerations may require a lesser offence to be left. In the present case it does appear that it was a tenable possibility that the jury might reject the evidence of Dawn Shaw about the conversation in her house, in which event the jury would need direction about the matters requiring proof if Campbell was to be convicted of murder on the basis of having taken part in a joint enterprise. In such event they might have acquitted him of murder, though finding him guilty of assisting the offender.’ Carswell LCJ also made it clear that a flexible approach is required when he added: ‘[Defence counsel] submitted that it was for the judge to ensure that all material issues were placed before the jury, even if not argued overtly by him in closing. We feel impelled to agree with this submission. For the reasons which we have stated, we are of the opinion that the case does not fall within the category of those in which the issue does not arise in the way in which the case has been presented to the court. It is not one in which Campbell has admitted that the offence was committed. The possibility was there that he took some lesser part in the affair than full complicity in murder, and that possibility was not removed by his denial that he had anything at all to do with the attack. We therefore must conclude that the judge should have left the lesser offence to the jury and given them an appropriate direction on the law relating to join enterprise.’

Judges:

Carswell LCJ

Citations:

[2001] NICA 25, [2001] NIJB 269

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Citing:

Approved – Alexander Von Starck v The Queen PC 28-Feb-2000
(Jamaica) The defendant had fatally stabbed a woman. On arrest, he admitted killing her and that he had the knife which he had used to do so. He gave the police officer a pouch containing a knife, on which blood of the same group as that of the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Coutts, Regina v CACD 21-Jan-2005
The defendant appealed his conviction for murder, saying that the judge should have left to the jury the alternative conviction for manslaughter. The victim had died through strangulation during a sexual assault by the defendant. He said it had not . .
Cited – Regina v Coutts HL 19-Jul-2006
The defendant was convicted of murder. Evidence during the trial suggested a possibility of manslaughter, but neither the defence nor prosecution proposed the alternate verdict. The defendant now appealed saying that the judge had an independent . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.201984

Gilmour, Regina v: CANI 5 Jun 2000

An accessory to a crime of specific intent is guilty to the extent of his own intention and no more. Even though the actual act which was carried out was of the nature of that intended, the fact that it went further than he anticipated was relevant. The applicant went along with a fire bombing not anticipating the infliction of grievous bodily harm, but his accomplices used a much more substantial volume of accelerant, causing a conflagration and three deaths. He was guilty of manslaughter not murder.

Citations:

Times 21-Jun-2000, [2000] NICA 10, [2000] NIECA 10

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Crime, Northern Ireland

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.201928

Regina v M and Others: CACD 5 Oct 2001

The court considered the nature of the detention of a defendant when he was found unfit to plead. Rose LJ said: ‘The old orders available to the courts [including the hospital order with restrictions] do not include any punishment or any order that can be seen as retributive or deterrent. With the exception of an absolute discharge, they are concerned with the treatment and care of the accused.’

As to the effect of the Human Rights Convention Rose LJ said: ‘The right to liberty and security is the subject of article 5. Detention after conviction is only one of the cases in which deprivation of liberty is permitted by article 5.5(1). In the present connection, the other relevant paragraph of article 5(1) is (e): the lawful detention of persons of unsound mind. The protection of persons detained on the ground that they are of unsound mind is contained in article 5(4).’

Judges:

Rose LJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Crim 2024, [2001] MHLR 177, [2002] 1 Cr App R 25, [2002] 1 WLR 824, [2002] Crim LR 57

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Juncal, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and others CA 25-Jul-2008
The claimant appealed dismissal of his claim for wrongful imprisonment having been detained in 1997 on being found unfit to plead to an offence of violence.
Held: Parliament had a legitimate concern for the protection of the public, and . .
Cited – Norman, Regina v CACD 31-Jul-2008
The defendant suffered a degenerative disease affecting his mental capacity, and at trial the issue of his fitness to plead arose.
Held: Where the issue of unfitness arose it was necessary for the court to exercise very careful case management . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Health

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.201598

Roach, Regina v: CACD 4 Dec 2001

Appeal from rejection of defence of automatism to charge of wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm

Judges:

Potter LJ, Rafferty J, Zucker QC HHJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Crim 2648, [2001] EWCA Crim 2700; [2001]

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.201602

Regina v Director of Public Prosecutions, ex parte Jones: CA 2000

A company Managing Director had arranged for a dockside crane to be adapted, so that with the jaws of the grab bucket open bags could be attached to hooks fitted within the bucket. Jones was in the hold of a ship loading bags onto the hooks when the jaws of the bucket closed and he was decapitated. In deciding not to prosecute the managing director and the company for gross negligence, the lack of subjective recklessness on his part was ‘dispositive’
Held: If the accused is subjectively reckless, then that may be taken into account by the jury as a strong factor demonstrating that his negligence was criminal, but negligence will still be criminal in the absence of any recklessness if on an objective basis the defendant demonstrated a ‘failure to advert to a serious risk going beyond mere inadvertence in respect of an obvious and important matter which the defendant’s duty demanded that he should address.’ That is a test in objective terms.

Judges:

Buxton LJ

Citations:

[2000] IRLR 373

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Shulman, Regina v Prentice, Regina v Adomako and Regina v Holloway CACD 21-May-1993
A patient had been injected with the wrong medicine, and died as a result.
Held: The ingredients of the offence of involuntary manslaughter by breach of duty are the existence and breach of a duty, which had caused death and gross negligence . .
Approved – West Yorkshire Trading Standards Service v Lex Vehicle Leasing Ltd QBD 9-Feb-1995
It was alleged that the maximum permitted front axle weight of the vehicle in question was exceeded. The court was asked what were the circimstances defing a ‘user’ of a motor vehicle in prosecutions for use of the vehicle.
Held: ‘The . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina on the Application of Rowley v Director of Public Prosecutions QBD 4-Apr-2003
The applicant sought to challenge a decision not to prosecute a third party following the death of her son. He had been in care, having multiple disabilities, including epilepsy. He drowned whilst in a bath. It had been recognised that he needed . .
Cited – Cambridgeshire County Council v Associated Lead Mills Ltd ChD 22-Jul-2005
The prosecutor appealed dismissal of the charge of driving a heavy commercial vehicle on a road which was subject to a maximum weight restriction in breach of the 1984 Act. The company denied that it had any knowledge of the actual route taken by . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Company

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.180636

Regina v Bray: CA 4 Jul 1988

Citations:

Times 04-Jul-1988

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Minors, Regina v Harper CACD 14-Dec-1988
In each case, the prosecution had produced a computer record to the court as evidence. The record was a computer print out. They challenged their convictions.
Held: To admit such evidence, the court had to see compliance with both sections. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.183048

Regina v Arthur: 5 Nov 1981

Judges:

Farquharson J

Citations:

(Unreported 5-Nov-1981)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

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

Crime

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.180320

Holmes v Governor of Brixton Prison and Another: Admn 20 Aug 2004

The applicant sought his release from imprisonment where he awaited extradition to Germany. He was suspected of an offence of deception. He said there was insufficient evidence that the offence alleged would be an offence here. The alleged offence involved having misused the passwords of others, which was the deception of a machine.
Held: Davies v Flackett was not authority to say that a machine could not be deceived and an unauthorised access offence might have been charged in any event under the 1990 Act. Human beings were also deceived in this case, not just a machine. However ‘credited’ under the 1968 Act required an unconditional adjustment to the banker’s balance, and a correspondening debit of which there was no evidence here. However the credit became unconditional, and judicial note was taken that banks do not credit one account without another being debited. The charge of obtaining a money transfer by deception was made out. Theft was also made out.

Judges:

Mr Justice Henriques and Mr Justice Stanley Burntonzz

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 2020 (Admin), Times 28-Oct-2004

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Extradition Act 1989 9(8)(a), Theft Act 1968 15A 15B, Computer Misuse Act 1990 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Davies v Flackett 1973
One cannot deceive a machine, since it does not have a mind. This may not be the case for the purposes of the Theft Acts. . .
Cited – Attorney-General’s Reference (No 1 of 1991) CACD 16-Jun-1992
cw Crime – Computer misuse – Unauthorised access – Person using one computer to obtain from it unauthorised benefit – Whether unauthorised use of single computer within statute – ‘Access to any program or data . .
Cited – Regina v Adebayo CACD 7-Jul-1997
The defendant had been employed in the probate registry, and sought by deception to conspire with others to use the information he obtained to obtain money from estates. He appealed, saying that the court should not have convicted him of obtaining . .
Distinguished – Attorney-General’s Reference (No 1 of 1985) CACD 1986
An employee had made a secret profit by selling his own goods on his employer’s premises, thereby breaking the terms of his contract of employment.
Held: The moneys the employee received from his private customers were not received on account . .
Cited – Regina v Governor of Pentonville Prison, Ex Parte Osman QBD 30-Mar-1988
The applicant had been committed to prison pending extradition proceedings brought by Hong Kong alleging substantial fraud. He challenged the committal on the grounds that since the allegations involved transmission of funds over international . .
Cited – Kaur v Chief Constable for Hampshire CACD 1981
The court was concerned not to extend the Theft Act to include as thefts activities which many people would not consider to be such: ‘the court should not be astute to find that a theft has taken place where it would be straining the language so to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Extradition, Crime

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.200348

Deans, Regina v: CACD 30 Jul 2004

In 1989 the defendant was convicted of assorted serious drugs crimes. His case came before the court once more but on the basis that the evidence against him had been fabricated by police officers who had subsequently been discredited.
Held: The evidence was not sufficiently contemporaneous to put doubt on the officers’ evidence and the appeal was dismissed.

Judges:

Lord Justice Maurice Kay, Mr Justice Simon And Sir Charles Mantell

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Crim 2123

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Edwards CACD 31-Jan-1996
Police evidence which had been impugned by suggestions of perjury was not to be used not to found a conviction. A senior officer can be in a position to infect the whole investigative process and evidence so as to render the conviction unsafe: ‘Once . .
Cited – Regina v Pendleton HL 13-Dec-2001
The defendant had appealed his conviction for murder to the Court of Appeal. The 1968 Act required the court to consider whether the conviction was unsafe. New evidence was before the Court of Appeal, but they had rejected the appeal.
Held: . .
Cited – Regina v Twitchell CACD 10-Nov-1999
The Court of Appeal is not able to make findings of fact. The ability for example to examine an officer to assist the court in deciding whether the original verdict was based upon ignorance or otherwise of material facts, should be used only . .
Cited – Regina v Guney CACD 27-Feb-1998
The defence should be told of convictions of police officers and misconduct findings, but requests for such information must be realistic as to the limits to the practicality of providing complete answers. The court referred to ‘a fairly consistent . .
Cited – Regina v Whelan CACD 22-Oct-1996
The defendant appealed his conviction based upon the evidence of police officers who were subsequently discredited. . .
Cited – Regina v Fraser CACD 2-Oct-2003
The court quashed a conviction following a reference by the Criminal Cases Review Commission. Detective Constable Breakwell had been a witness at the trial of Fraser.
Held: ‘But what has emerged so far is sufficiently disturbing, particularly . .
Cited – Regina v Mohammed Ali Jamil CACD 17-Jul-2001
The appeal was made by the widow of the appellant, on the basis that his conviction had been obtained on the basis of non-disclosure of relevant evidence by the police. The test was ‘would the only reasonable and proper verdict been one of guilty’ . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199637

Holland v Her Majesty’s Advocate: IHCS 16 Jun 2004

Judges:

Lord Justice Clerk And Lord Hamilton And Lord Penrose

Citations:

[2004] ScotHC 39

Links:

ScotC, Bailii

Citing:

Appeal from – Holland v Her Majesty’s Advocate HCJ 21-Aug-2003
The defendant appealed his conviction after a dock identification.
Held: Scotland is unique among the jurisdictions in the United Kingdom in the significance that it attaches to dock identification. However, Scottish law was not alone in this. . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Holland v Her Majesty’s Advocate (Devolution) PC 11-May-2005
The defendant appealed his convictions for robbery. He had been subject to a dock identification, and he complained that the prosecution had failed in its duties of disclosure.
Held: The combination of several failings meant that the defendant . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.198824

Kemsley v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 4 Feb 2004

The defendant appealed a conviction for driving with excess alcohol. She said she had not first been cautioned when interviewed after an accident and that her admission that she had been driving should not have been allowed in evidence.
Held: That admission had properly been admitted. An expert for the defence had said that the intoximeter device had been modified in answer to criticisms of its inability to differentiate the presence of mouth alcohol. The device was not the same as that which has been approved, the results of its use cannot be admissible even where it was substantially like an approved device, and even if its performance is the same as that of an approved device. Since it had been modified, it was no longer an approved device. However if the judge had accepted that it was not an approved device, the reading could not have been admitted.

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 278 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Road Traffic Act 1988 5(1)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Breckon v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 22-Aug-2007
The defendant appealed against his conviction for driving with excess alcohol.
Held: There was no requirement that the prosecutor should produce the results of the roadside breath test in evidence, and the breathalyser was of the approved . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic, Crime

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.197971

Regina v Bryce: CACD 18 May 2004

The defendant said that his involvement in the murder of which he had been convicted had been secondary only. He was alleged to have transported the killer and the gun which he used to commit the murder to a caravan near the victim’s home so that the killer could wait for an opportunity to carry out the killing. The appellant’s case was that he knew nothing of the gun or the plan to murder the victim. He had simply given the eventual killer a lift. He did not give evidence. At the time of the assistance, the killer, on his own evidence, had had reservations about carrying out the killing, although he had not expressed these reservations to anyone. His resolve to do so was strengthened by a subsequent visit from the person who instigated the crime. The trial judge directed the jury that the appellant would be guilty as an accessory if he deliberately assisted the killer by taking him to the caravan with the gun, knowing that this was in order to assist the killer to kill or cause really serious injury to the victim, or realising that there was a real possibility that he might do so. The fact that the killer had not reached a final decision, in his own mind, whether to go through with the murder was no defence. It was submitted on appeal against conviction that the case should have been withdrawn from the jury in the absence of evidence that, at the time of the assistance, the principal offender had formed the intent to commit the offence.
Held: The submission was rejected. All that was necessary in the secondary party was foresight of the real possibility that an offence would be committed by the principal.
The prosecution had to prove intentional assistance. They must prove that an act done by the appellant in fact assisted the later commission of the offence, an act which the appellant did deliberately, realising that it was capable of assisting the offence; and that at the time of doing the act, the appellant contemplated the commission of the offence, that is he foresaw it as a ‘real or substantial’ risk or ‘real possibility’.

Judges:

Mr Justice Astill Lord Justice Potter The Honourable Mr Justice Hooper

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Crim 1231, [2004] 2 Cr App R 35

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Accessory and Abettors Act 1861 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Powell (Anthony) and Another; Regina v English HL 30-Oct-1997
When the court looked at the issue of foreseeability of murder in an allegation of joint enterprise, there was no requirement to show intent by the secondary party. The forseeability of the risk of the principal committing the offence from the point . .
Cited – National Coal Board v Gamble QBD 1958
M drove a lorry used for carrying coal from the NCB quarries to power station. H was employed by the NCB to operate a weighbridge, providing tickets to drivers as to the weight on board, and aa a delivery note. On this occasion, the lorry was . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions for Northern Ireland v Lynch HL 1975
The House considered the availability of duress as a defence on a charge of aiding and abetting murder. Referring to the basic elements of criminal liability, mens rea and actus reus: ‘Both terms have, however, justified themselves by their . .
Cited – Regina v Rook CACD 29-Jan-1993
The fact that the appellant had absented himself on the day the murder was carried out by the defendant who did the killing did not amount to an unequivocal communication of the appellant’s withdrawal from the scheme contemplated at the time he gave . .

Cited by:

Cited – Equality and Human Rights Commission v Prime Minister and Others Admn 3-Oct-2011
The defendant had published a set of guidelines for intelligence officers called upon to detain and interrogate suspects. The defendant said that the guidelines could only be tested against individual real life cases, and that the court should not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.196969

Regina (on the Application of Gjovalin Pepushi) v Crown Prosecution Service: Admn 11 May 2004

The claimant was stopped when boarding a flight to Canada, having previously stopped in France and Italy. He bore a false Swedish passport, and intended to claim asylum in Canada. He now claimed the benefit of the article 31 (per Adimi), to defend a prosecution under the 1981 Act for using a false instrument.
Held: The scope of section 31 was less than article 31 of the Convention, which did not apply directly, but only through the section. The court should attempt to construe the section to give effect to the Convention, but if it could not, it had to apply the section. That was the case here. No legitimate expectation could arise in favour of the claimant. A decision to prosecute is not ordinarily subject to judicial review save in wholly exceptional circumstances.
Thomas LJ said: ‘In view of the frequency of applications seeking to challenge decisions to prosecute, we wish to make it clear . . that, save in wholly exceptional circumstances, applications in respect of pending prosecutions that seek to challenge the decision to prosecute should not be made to this court. The proper course to follow, as should have been followed in this case, is to take the point in accordance with the procedures of the Criminal Courts. In the Crown Court that would ordinarily be by way of defence in the Crown Court and if necessary on appeal to the Court of Appeal Criminal Division. The circumstances in which a challenge is made to the bringing of a prosecution should be very rare indeed as the speeches in Kebilene make clear.’

Judges:

Silber, Mr Justice Silber Lord Justice Thorpe

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 798 (Admin), Times 21-May-2004, [2004] INLR 638

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 31, Convention and Protocol Status of Refugees 31, Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Uxbridge Magistrates and Another ex parte Adimi; R v CPS ex parte Sorani; R v SSHD and Another ex parte Kaziu Admn 29-Jul-1999
The three asylum seeker appellants arrived in the United Kingdom at different times in possession of false passports. They were prosecuted for possession or use of false documents contrary to section 5, and for obtaining air services by deception . .
Cited – JH Rayner (Mincing Lane) Ltd v Department of Trade and Industry HL 1989
An undisclosed principal will not be permitted to claim to be party to a contract if this is contrary to the terms of the contract itself. Thus the provision in the standard form B contract of the London Metal Exchange ‘this contract is made between . .
Cited – Regina v Director of Public Prosecutions, ex parte Kebilene and others HL 28-Oct-1999
(Orse Kebeline) The DPP’s appeal succeeded. A decision by the DPP to authorise a prosecution could not be judicially reviewed unless dishonesty, bad faith, or some other exceptional circumstance could be shown. A suggestion that the offence for . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Fraydon Navabi; Senait Tekie Embaye CACD 11-Nov-2005
The defendants had been convicted of not having an immigration document when presenting themselves for interview. They had handed their passports to the ‘agents’ who had assisted their entry.
Held: The jury should have been directed as to the . .
Cited – E and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 10-Jun-2011
Judicial review was sought of a decision by the respondent to prosecute a child for her alleged sexual abuse of her younger sisters. Agencies other than the police and CPS considered that a prosecution would harm both the applicant and her sisters. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Crime

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.196702

Dacre Son and Hartley Ltd v North Yorkshire Trading Standards: Admn 27 Oct 2004

The defendants appealed a conviction under the Act complaining of the adequacy of the evidence presented. A buyer had found dampness in a property. It was later remarketed by the defendant who asked if it suffered dampness. She was told it did not.
Held: ‘the informations each described the specific offence charged in ordinary language and gave sufficient particulars so that the appellant was provided with reasonable understanding of the nature and detail of the charges. ‘ and ‘if a defendant genuinely considers that lack of particularity in the information (as opposed, for instance, to a defect inherently fatal to the charge) has created the potential for unfairness e.g. because of uncertainty as to the case the defendant has to meet — this should usually be raised in advance of the trial, so that the court can consider the position. Deliberately deferring the issue until midway through the trial will usually make it materially more difficult for the defendant to complain that the trial is unfair. ‘

Judges:

Thomas LJ, Fulford J

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 2783 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Property Misdescriptions Act 1991 1, Magistrates’ Courts (Advance Information) Rules 1985 4(1)(a), Property Misdescriptions (Specified Matters) Order 1992, Magistrates’ Court Rules 1981 100

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Galbraith CCA 1981
Rejection of Submission of No Case to Answer
The defendant had faced a charge of affray. The court having rejected his submission of having no case to answer, he had made an exculpatory statement from the dock. He appealed against his conviction.
Held: Lord Lane LCJ said: ‘How then . .
Cited – Moran v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 30-Jan-2002
The appellant had requested the magistrates to state a case as to why they had ruled against his submission that he had no case to answer. The established rule is that they do not have to give such reasons. He argued that the new Human Rights duties . .
Cited – Regina v Aylesbury Justices, Ex parte Wisbey 1965
If a defendant considers that the particulars provided in an information are insufficient the court has the power, at any time after the charge has been preferred, to require the prosecution to furnish him with better and more complete particulars. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Agency, Crime

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.220180

Regina v Edwards, Denton and Jackson Hendley Crowley; Attorney General’s Reference (No. 1 of 2004): CACD 29 Apr 2004

The court considered references by the Attorney-General with regard to offences imposing a burden of proof upon the defendant. ‘An evidential burden will be discharged by a defendant by ensuring that there is some evidence before the court which could result in a reasonable court or jury determining the issue which is the subject of the reverse burden in the accused’s favour. A classic every day example is self defence; if the defendant adduces some evidence raising the issue, the prosecution then has the burden of disproving self defence. The defendant does not have to prove that he was acting in self defence. Rather the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that he was not so acting. A ‘legal burden’ is a greater hurdle for the defendant to clear, as he must satisfy a court on the balance of probabilities (but not beyond reasonable doubt) on the issues that are the subject of the reverse burden. The imposition of an evidential burden is therefore considerably easier to justify than a legal burden. ‘ The court gave detailed guidance on when a reverse legal burden of proof might be acceptable. A reverse evidential burden should not be a problem. The court also explained and described the different purposes and consequences of pre-trial and preparatory hearings. ‘Courts should strongly discourage the citation of authority to them other than the decision of the House of Lords in Johnstone and this guidance. Johnstone is at present the latest word on the subject.’

Judges:

Mr Justice Elias Mr Justice Gage Lord Justice Judge Justice, Lord Chief Justice Mr Justice Stanley Burnton

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Crim 1025, Times 30-Apr-2004, Gazette 20-May-2004, [2004] 1 WLR 2111, [2004] 2 Cr App R(S) 27

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6, Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 29

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

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 by:

Cited – Sheldrake v Director of Public Prosecutions; Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002 HL 14-Oct-2004
Appeals were brought complaining as to the apparent reversal of the burden of proof in road traffic cases and in cases under the Terrorism Acts. Was a legal or an evidential burden placed on a defendant?
Held: Lord Bingham of Cornhill said: . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Barker Admn 19-Oct-2004
Driving whilst disqualified – ban expired but no test taken – burden of evidence . .
Cited – Goodyear, Karl, Regina v CACD 19-Apr-2005
The defendant complained that he had pleaded guilty to a charge of corruption on the basis of an indication from the judge that he would not receive a custodial sentence. Having pleaded guilty he had then been sentenced to a six months prison . .
Applied – Regina v L, G etc CACD 17-Jun-2005
A cash sum of andpound;87,000 was transferred. The defendants appealed against a ruling under the 1996 Act, saying that at the time of its transfer, the property did not represent criminal property under the Act.
Held: The pre-conditions for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Human Rights, Evidence

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.196055

McKearney v Her Majesty’s Advocate: HCJ 16 Jan 2004

The appellant had been convicted of rape. The court was now asked: ‘(1) whether the trial judge failed properly to direct the jury on the question of mens rea; (2) whether he erred in directing them to disregard the question of honest belief; (3) whether distress de recenti on the part of the complainer was evidence of mens rea on the part of the appellant, and (4) whether the jury were entitled to hold that the complainer remained frightened of the appellant when he had intercourse with her.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Clerk And Lord Kirkwood And Lord Mccluskey

Citations:

[2004] ScotHC HCJAC – 69, 2004 SCCR 251, 2004 JC 87, 2004 GWD 15-332, 2004 SLT 739

Links:

ScotC, Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.195840

Cash, Regina v: CACD 26 Mar 2004

Reasons for allowing appeals against convictions for rape and kidnapping. New evidence as to mental capacity.

Judges:

Potter LJ, Forbes J, Tilling HHJ

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Crim 666

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.194903