Category: Crime

Regina v Boswell: CACD 1987

The Court relied on the rule that counsel was entitled, in certain narrowly prescribed circumstances, counsel to brief another counsel to appear on his or own behalf in respect of a costs dispute, to permit counsel in those circumstances to claim costs where that counsel had appeared for himself. It is clear from the statement of reasons by Leggatt J that His Lordship considered that that rule was a necessary added factor which would entitle counsel in that case to avail himself of the statement of the rule in Chorley’s case.

Judges:

Leggatt J

Citations:

[1987] 1 WLR 705, [1987] 2 All ER 513

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Khan v Lord Chancellor QBD 17-Jan-2003
The applicant was a barrister. He had been tried and acquitted of criminal charges, and had been awarded cost from central funds. He appealed from a refusal of a claim for payment for the time he spent in preparation.
Held: The applicant was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 12 May 2022; Ref: scu.181245

Regina v Stone and Dobinson: CACD 1977

The male defendant, Stone, and his mentally disabled son lived in Stone’s house with the female defendant, Dobinson. Stone’s sister came to live as a lodger. She neglected herself to such an extent that she became helplessly infirm. Fanny refused to supply the name of her GP because she thought she might be ‘put away’ if she did. She refused to leave her bed. Although they knew that the sister was in poor condition Stone and Dobinson failed to obtain help. In particular, they did not say anything to the social worker who visited the son. Dobinson attempted with a neighbour to wash the sister. The neighbour suggested she should contact social services and the landlord of their local pub which they visited every day advised calling a doctor. Nothing was done and three weeks later the sister died from the effects of immobilisation, infected bed sores and malnutrition. The prosecution case was that the defendants had undertaken a duty of care towards a person who could not care for herself. The defendants appealed on the ground that the deterioration in her condition was not something for which they could be responsible.
Held: The Court of Appeal disagreed. The appeal failed.
Geoffrey Lane LJ said: ‘This was not a situation analogous to the drowning stranger. They did make efforts to care . . The jury were entitled to find that the duty had been assumed. They were entitled to conclude that once Fanny became helplessly infirm, as she had by July 19, the appellants were, in the circumstances, obliged to summon help or else care for Fanny themselves.’

Judges:

Geoffrey Lane LJ

Citations:

[1977] 2 All ER 341, [1977] 2 WLR 169, [1977] 1 QB 354

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

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 – 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 – Jenkins, Regina (on The Application of) v HM Coroner for Portsmouth and South and Others Admn 11-Dec-2009
The deceased had contracted gangrene, but not sought treatment, and he died of it. The claimant challenged the narrative verdict saying that it was perverse and that the only proper verdict was unlawful killing by his partner, a nurse who had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 12 May 2022; Ref: scu.180377

Regina v Dalby: CACD 1982

Dalby and O’Such were drug addicts. Dalby had obtained 32 tablets of Diconal lawfully. Dalby supplied O’Such with some tablets and probably certain further tablets during the evening. Each injected himself intravenously and they then went out shortly parting company. O’Such met another friend who helped him administer an intravenous injection of an unspecified substance, shortly before midnight, and later a second intravenous injection. When Dalby returned to the flat O’Such was already asleep and Dalby went to sleep himself. O’Such could not be woken. Mrs O’Such later called an ambulance, and the ambulance attendants found O’Such was dead.
Held: ‘the supply of drugs would itself have caused no harm unless the deceased had subsequently used the drugs in a form and quantity which was dangerous’. It was an act which made it possible that harm would occur subsequently. In the reported cases, the physical act has been one which inevitably would subject the other person to the risk of some harm from the act itself. In this case, the supply of drugs would itself have caused no harm unless the deceased had subsequently used the drugs in a form and quantity which was dangerous. Appeal allowed.

Citations:

[1982] 74 Cr App Rep 348, [1982] CLY 639, [1982] 1 WLR 425

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Distinguished – Regina v Kennedy CACD 31-Jul-1998
The defendant was convicted of manslaughter having handed a loaded a syringe with heroin and handed it to a friend who injected himself, and later died.
Held: The defendant had gone beyond the minimum necessary for criminal liability. All it . .
Explained – Regina v Goodfellow CACD 1986
The defendant had failed to get re-housed. He planned to burn down his present lodgings, rescuing the other inhabitants. Three died in his attempt. He appealed a conviction for manslaughter.
Held: The case was either an unlawful act or . .
Cited – Kennedy v Regina CACD 17-Mar-2005
The court considered when it was appropriate to find someone guilty of manslaughter where that person has been involved in the supply of a Class A controlled drug, which is then self administered by the person to whom it is supplied, and the . .
Cited – Regina v Dias CACD 13-Dec-2001
The defendant appealed against his conviction for manslaughter. Both the deceased and the defendant had injected themselves with syringes prepared by D. The judge directed the jury that the self-injection of the heroin by the deceased was an . .
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 12 May 2022; Ref: scu.180389

Felstead v The King: 1914

Citations:

[1914] AC 534

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Antoine HL 30-Mar-2000
The appellant sought to argue that despite having been found unfit to plead under the 1964 Act, it was still open to him to argue that the defence under section 2 of the 1957 Act applied, and that he was entitled to be plead diminished . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 12 May 2022; Ref: scu.179531

Attorney-General v Able and Others: QBD 28 Apr 1983

The Attorney General sought a declaration as to whether it would be the crime of aiding and abetting or counselling and procuring suicide, to distribute a booklet published by the respondent which described various effective ways of committing suicide. The stated aim of the booklet was to help readers overcome the fear of dying.
Held: The offence would be committed only in the particular circumstances of the booklet being supplied to a particular individual considering suicide and with the intent of assisting or encouraging him. The offence was not committed by the general distribution of the booklet. However the court should also be reluctant to make declarations in advance as to the legality or otherwise of particular acts. That risked usurping the function of the court which considered a particular set of circumstances.

Judges:

Woolf LJ

Citations:

[1983] 3 WLR 845, [1984] 1 QB 795, [1984] 1 All ER 277

Links:

lip

Statutes:

Suicide Act 1961 2(1)

Citing:

Cited – Imperial Tobacco Ltd v Attorney-General HL 1980
The applicant sought a declaration as to the lawfulness of a lottery scheme whilst criminal proceedings were pending against it for the same scheme.
Held: It was not necessary to decide whether a declaration as to the criminality or otherwise . .
Cited – Attorney-General v Bastow 1957
The case involved an attempt by a local authority to enforce planning control by a relator action requiring the removal of caravans on land in breach of planning control. The use of the service of stop notices, are supported by the power of the . .
Cited – Gouriet v Union of Post Office Workers HL 26-Jul-1977
The claimant sought an injunction to prevent the respondent Trades Union calling on its members to boycott mail to South Africa. The respondents challenged the ability of the court to make such an order.
Held: The wide wording of the statute . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Her Majesty’s Attorney General ex parte Rusbridger and Another HL 26-Jun-2003
Limit to Declaratory Refilef as to Future Acts
The applicant newspaper editor wanted to campaign for a republican government. Articles were published, and he sought confirmation that he would not be prosecuted under the Act, in the light of the 1998 Act.
Held: Declaratory relief as to the . .
Cited – I-CD Publishing Ltd v The Secretary of State, The Information Commissioner (Interested Party) Admn 21-Jul-2003
The claimant sought judicial review challenging the restrictions on the sale of electoral registers to registered credit reference agencies. Following Robertson (1) the new regulations created two registers, and the claimant sought to be able to . .
Cited – Rusbridger and Another v Attorney General CA 20-Mar-2002
The paper wanted to publish an article about the monarchy but was concerened that it might lead to it being prosecuted under the 1848 Act. The complainant sought declarations as to the incompatibility of the 1848 Act with the 1998 Act.
Held: . .
Cited – Phonographic Performance Limited v Department of Trade and Industry HM Attorney General ChD 23-Jul-2004
The claimant represented the interests of copyright holders, and complained that the defendant had failed to implement the Directive properly, leaving them unable properly to collect royalties in the music rental market. The respondent argued that . .
Cited – Bowman v Fels (Bar Council and Others intervening) CA 8-Mar-2005
The parties had lived together in a house owned in the defendant’s name and in which she claimed an interest. The claimant’s solicitors notified NCIS that they thought the defendant had acted illegally in setting off against his VAT liability the . .
Cited – Regina v RL and JF CACD 28-Aug-2008
Club, not members, prosecutable for breach
The Environment Agency appealed against dismissal of charges against the defendants who were officers in an unincorporated members’ golf club on whose land there had been pollution. The judge had ruled that the unincorporated association could have . .
Cited – Jogee and Ruddock (Jamaica) v The Queen SC 18-Feb-2016
Joint Enterprise Murder
(and in Privy Council) The two defendants appealed against their convictions (one in Jamaica) for murder, under the law of joint enterprise. Each had been an accessory when their accomplice killed a victim with a knife. The judge in Jogee had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Administrative, Criminal Practice, Media

Updated: 12 May 2022; Ref: scu.174704

Whitehouse v Lemon; Whitehouse v Gay News Ltd: HL 21 Feb 1979

The appellants challenged their conviction for blasphemous libel. They had published a poem which described homosexual acts carried out on the body of Christ after his death.
Held: For a conviction, it was necessary to show that the defendant had published the material, and that it was of the necessary character, namely that it vilified Christ in his life and crucifixion. It was not necessary to show that the defendant intended the blasphemy. A blasphemous libel is a publication of material calculated to shock or outrage the feelings of Christians. There is no need to show additionally a tendency to cause a breach of the peace.
Lord Scarman gave the rationale for the existence of an offence of blasphemy: ‘I do not subscribe to the view that the common law offence of blasphemous libel serves no useful purpose in the modern law. On the contrary, I think there is a case for legislation extending it to protect the religious beliefs and feelings of non-Christians. The offence belongs to a group of criminal offences designed to safeguard the internal tranquillity of the kingdom. In an increasingly plural society such as that of modern Britain it is necessary not only to respect the differing religious beliefs, feelings and practices of all but also to protect them from scurrility, vilification, ridicule and contempt . . I will not lend my voice to a view of the law relating to blasphemous libel which would render it a dead letter, or diminish its efficacy to protect religious feelings from outrage and insult’

Judges:

Lord Diplock, Viscount Dilhorne, Lord Edmund-Davies, Lord Russell of Killowen and Lord Scarman

Citations:

[1979] 2 WLR 281, [1979] AC 617

Links:

lip

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Rex v Shipley; Rex v Dean of St Asaph 1784
Tasks of Jury and Judge in Defamation Trial
In an action for defamation it is the jury’s task to decide whether the words were published and whether they are true. It is for the judge to decide whether the words are libellous. Lord Mansfield said: ‘The liberty of the press consists in . .
Applied – Regina v Hetherington 1841
Lord Denman CJ directed a jury on a trial for blasphemous libel: ‘Because, a difference of opinion may subsist, not only as between different sects of Christians, but also with regard to the great doctrines of Christianity itself . . even . .
Applied – Regina v Bradlaugh 1883
. .
Appeal from – Whitehouse v Lemon; Whitehouse v Gay News Ltd CA 1979
The defendants, editors and publisher respectively of ‘Gay News’ had been accused of blasphemous libel. The magazine had a poem entitled ‘The love that dare not Speak its Name’. it is not a necessary part of the offence that there should be an . .

Cited by:

Cited – Green, Regina (on the Application of) v The City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court, Thoday, Thompson Admn 5-Dec-2007
The claimant appealed from the refusal by the magistrate to issue summonses for the prosecution for blashemous libel of the Director General of the BBC and the producers of a show entitled ‘Jerry Springer – The Opera.’
Held: The gist of the . .
Cited – Dhir v Saddler QBD 6-Dec-2017
Slander damages reduced for conduct
Claim in slander. The defendant was said, at a church meeting to have accused the client of threatening to slit her throat. The defendant argued that the audience of 80 was not large enough.
Held: ‘the authorities demonstrate that it is the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation, Crime, Ecclesiastical

Updated: 12 May 2022; Ref: scu.174079

Regina v Hewitson, Bramich, Vincent: CACD 24 Sep 1998

The defendants appealed their conviction after admission of evidence taken from secret tape recordings taken from a recording device hidden in the garage of one of the defendants.
Held: The evidence had been properly admitted. It was not possible to say that the convictions were unsafe.

Citations:

[1998] EWCA Crim 2653

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Chalkley, Jeffries CACD 19-Dec-1997
The 1995 Act will not permit the Court of Appeal to allow an appeal where a conviction was safe but there was a substantial procedural unfairness. In order to understand the role of pre-1 January 1996 jurisprudence in applying what is now the . .
Cited – Regina v Graham CACD 1997
Under the 1995 Act the sole test to be applied by the court is whether the conviction is unsafe. If the court is satisfied, despite any misdirection of law or any irregularity in the conduct of the trial or any fresh evidence, that the conviction is . .
Cited – Regina v Greene CACD 8-Apr-1997
The crucial event was the change of plea to guilty. If a defendant submits that admitted facts do not in law amount to the offence charged and the trial judge rules otherwise, then it is not difficult to see how an appeal against conviction can lie . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Hewitson v The United Kingdom ECHR 27-May-2003
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8 ; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient ; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings
The applicant had been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Evidence

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.155527

Regina v Honeyghon, Sayles: CACD 31 Jul 1998

The appellants challenged their convictions for murder. There had been what was described as a wall of silence preventing witnesses coming forward.

Citations:

[1998] EWCA Crim 2527, [1999] CrimLR 221

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Gordon CACD 6-Jul-1999
The appellant was one of two convicted of murder. He appealed that conviction. Another youth had first denied any knowledge but then implicated the defendant after being arrested for other offences. The prosecution had been allowed to treat that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.155401

Regina v Kennedy: CACD 31 Jul 1998

The defendant was convicted of manslaughter having handed a loaded a syringe with heroin and handed it to a friend who injected himself, and later died.
Held: The defendant had gone beyond the minimum necessary for criminal liability. All it is necessary for a sober and reasonable person to realise was that some risk of harm, albeit not serious harm, would result from his act. In this instance, an encouragement to inject carried with it the risk of some harm, even from the prick of the needle, never mind an injection of a lesser quantity of heroin than that which actually caused the death.

Citations:

[1998] EWCA Crim 2545, [1999] Crim LR 65

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Distinguished – Regina v Dalby CACD 1982
Dalby and O’Such were drug addicts. Dalby had obtained 32 tablets of Diconal lawfully. Dalby supplied O’Such with some tablets and probably certain further tablets during the evening. Each injected himself intravenously and they then went out . .
Cited – Attorney-General’s Reference (No 3 of 1994) HL 24-Jul-1997
The defendant stabbed a pregnant woman. The child was born prematurely and died. The attack had been directed at the mother, and the proper offence was manslaughter.
Held: The only questions which need to be addressed are (1) whether the act . .
Cited – Regina v Goodfellow CACD 1986
The defendant had failed to get re-housed. He planned to burn down his present lodgings, rescuing the other inhabitants. Three died in his attempt. He appealed a conviction for manslaughter.
Held: The case was either an unlawful act or . .

Cited by:

Doubted – Regina v Rogers CACD 14-Mar-2003
The defendant appealed a conviction for manslaughter and assault under the 1861 Act. He held a belt around a friend’s arm whilst the friend injected heroin into his own vein. The friend later died from the overdose. He said the use of the tourniquet . .
First Appeal – Kennedy v Regina CACD 17-Mar-2005
The court considered when it was appropriate to find someone guilty of manslaughter where that person has been involved in the supply of a Class A controlled drug, which is then self administered by the person to whom it is supplied, and the . .
Applied – Regina v Dias CACD 13-Dec-2001
The defendant appealed against his conviction for manslaughter. Both the deceased and the defendant had injected themselves with syringes prepared by D. The judge directed the jury that the self-injection of the heroin by the deceased was an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.155419

West Wiltshire District Council v Snelgrove and Snelgrove: Admn 17 Mar 1997

The council appealed against the acquittal of the defendants of offences under the 1977 Act. The occupiers were there under an informal temporary tenancy. The owners wished to move back in. The tenants had not left on the day appointed and on the day after the owners returned to find the house damaged and in a mess. The owners chose not to press charges, and the tenants after being intially refused entry to the house were let back in. On the same day. The magistrates found there was a licence only, and no tenancy and that the arrangement was an act of charity and a casual arrangement.
Held: No money had passed or was to pass between the parties as payment for occupation, and therefore the occupation was excluded from protection under the Act. Payments had been for the utilities only.

Citations:

[1997] EWHC Admin 285

Statutes:

Protection from Eviction Act 1977

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Norton v Knowles 1969
The court made the distinction between a mistaken belief as to the facts and a mistaken belief as to the law, pointing out that the latter ‘is, of course, not relevant or available as a ‘defence”. . .
Cited – Regina v Phekoo CACD 1981
The defendant was charged with doing acts calculated to interfere with the peace and comfort of residential occupiers so as to cause them to give up their occupation contrary to section 1(3)(a) of the 1977 Act. The defendant contended that he did . .
Cited – Bostock v Bryant 1990
When considering whether a payment has been paid by way of rent, the court looks to the explanation or reason for the payment, asking whether the payment is for exclusive use and occupation of the premises. In this case a payment by occupiers in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Crime

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.137230

Attorney-General’s Reference (No 1 of 1983): CACD 1984

The defendant, a police woman, had received an overpayment of wages. She recognised it as such. She did not withdraw any part of he money, but did not return it. She was accused of theft.
Held: A conviction for theft was possible even though the money had not been wihdrawn. A debt owed by the bank to the customer is a chose in action, which is ‘property’ and as such capable of being misappropriated or misapplied. The defendant had a legal obligation to return the sum.

Citations:

[1985] QB 182, [1984] Crim LR 570, (1984) 79 Cr App R 288, [1984] 3 WLR 686

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.565343

Morgentaler v Regina: 28 Jan 1988

Supreme Court of Canada – Constitutional law — Charter of Rights — Life, liberty and security of the person — Fundamental justice — Abortion — Criminal Code prohibiting abortion except where life or health of woman endangered — Whether or not abortion provisions infringe right to life, liberty and security of the person — If so, whether or not such infringement in accord with fundamental justice — Whether or not impugned legislation reasonable and demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society — Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, ss. 1, 7 — Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, s. 251.
Constitutional law — Jurisdiction — Superior court powers and inter-delegation — Whether or not therapeutic abortion committees exercising s. 96 court functions — Whether or not abortion provisions improperly delegate criminal law powers — Constitution Act, 1867, ss. 91(27), 96.
Constitutional law — Charter of Rights — Whether or not Attorney General’s right of appeal constitutional — Costs — Whether or not prohibition on costs constitutional — Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, ss. 605, 610(3).
Criminal law — Abortion — Criminal Code prohibiting abortion and procuring of abortion except where life or health of woman endangered — Whether or not abortion provisions ultra vires Parliament — Whether or not abortion provisions infringe right to life, liberty and security of the person — If so, whether or not such infringement in accord with fundamental justice — Whether or not impugned legislation reasonable and demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.
Criminal law — Juries — Address to jury advising them to ignore law as stated by judge — Counsel wrong.

Judges:

Dickson CJ and Beetz, Estey, McIntyre, Lamer, Wilson and La Forest JJ

Citations:

[1988] 1 SCR 30, 1988 CanLII 90 (SCC)

Links:

Canlii

Jurisdiction:

Canada

Constitutional, Human Rights, Crime, Health Professions

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.597674

Regina v Barrow: 1868

The defendant appealed aganst his conviction for rape.
Held: Bovill CJ said: ‘It does not appear that the woman, upon whom the offence was alleged to have been committed, was asleep or unconscious at the time when the act of connection commenced. It must be taken, therefore, that the act was done with the consent of the prosecutrix, though that consent was obtained by fraud. It falls therefore within the class of cases which decide that, where consent is obtained by fraud, the act done does not amount to rape.’

Judges:

Bovill CJ, Channell B, Byles J, Blackburn J and Lush J

Citations:

(1868) LR 1 CCR 156

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Linekar CACD 21-Oct-1994
L appealed against his conviction for rape. His victim was a woman working as a prostitute. He said that he had simply made off afterwards without payment. He was convicted on the basis that he had procured the act by a false pretence by him that he . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.554811

Regina v Williams: 1953

The defendant, a sup-post office mistress, appealed against her conviction for larceny by the use of of ‘false pretences’.
Held: When considering the word ‘fraudulently’ from the phrase ‘fraudulently and without claim of right made in good faith’ , it is for the judge to define whether a state of mind, once ascertained as a matter of fact, was or was not fraudulent.
Lord Goddard CJ said: ‘the court thinks that the word ‘fraudulently’ does add and is intended to add something to the words ‘without claim of right’ and we think it means this (though I am not saying that the words I am about to use will fit every case, but they certainly will fit this particular case) that the taking must be intentional and deliberate, that is to say, without mistake. You must know when you take the property that is the property of another person and that you are taking it deliberately, not by mistake and with an intention to deprive the person of the property in it. A very simple illustration which sometimes arises is where a person picks up a suitcase at a railway station believing that it is his. There may be a suitcase on the flat form when the luggage van is emptied which may so resemble his own that he may pick it up, believing it is his. There, the taking is under a mistake and he is not taking it fraudulently; of course, if he knows it is not his own, as the persons who haunt rail way stations for the purpose of stealing suitcases do, then it is larceny; but if a person, although he is not there setting up a claim of right against someone else, is taking away a suitcase in the mistaken belief that it is his own, he is not acting fraudulently. We think that the word ‘fraudulently’ in the section must mean that it is done intentionally and under no mistake, with the knowledge that it is the property of another person.’

Judges:

Lord Goddard CJ

Citations:

[1953] 1 QB 660, [1953] 1 All ER 1068, (1953) 37 Cr App R 71, [1953] 2 WLR 937, (1953) 117 JP 251

Statutes:

Larceny Act 1916 1(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Grainger Plc and Others v Nicholson EAT 3-Nov-2009
EAT RELIGION OR BELIEF DISCRIMINATION
A belief in man-made climate change, and the alleged resulting moral imperatives, is capable, if genuinely held, of being a philosophical belief for the purpose of the . .
Cited – Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd (T/A Crockfords) SC 25-Oct-2017
The claimant gambler sought payment of his winnings. The casino said that he had operated a system called edge-sorting to achieve the winnings, and that this was a form of cheating so as to excuse their payment. The system exploited tiny variances . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.597673

Rex v Williams: 1923

The victim complained of rape, saying that she had agreed only to a physical manipulation by the defendant choir master which would provide her with extra air supply to improve her singing.
Held: The appeal failed. The victim had not consented to sexual interourse.

Citations:

[1923] 1 KB 340

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Linekar CACD 21-Oct-1994
L appealed against his conviction for rape. His victim was a woman working as a prostitute. He said that he had simply made off afterwards without payment. He was convicted on the basis that he had procured the act by a false pretence by him that he . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.554810

Kivlin v Milne: 1979

Intention to deprive permanently. The defender took a car without the owner’s consent and left it in a place where it was not likely to be found.
Held: The Sheriff had been entitled to infer that there had been an intention to deprive the owner permanently, and therefore that there was theft.

Citations:

1979 SLT (Notes) 2

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.553821

Wings Ltd v Ellis: QBD 1984

Mann J said: ‘The most that could be said for the respondent is that the members of this class [those ruling the company], although establishing a system, failed to establish a system which would have prevented the mistake which occurred. That failure cannot, in our judgment, constitute ‘recklessness’. There may be cases where the system is such that he who establishes it could not be said to be having regard to the truth or falsity of what emerged from it, but that is not this case.’

Judges:

Mann J

Citations:

[1984] 1 All ER 1046, [1984] 1 WLR 731

Statutes:

Trade Descriptions Act 1968

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions, Regina (on the Application of) v Chorley Justices and Forrest Admn 8-Jun-2006
The prosecutor applied for an order to require the magistrates to state a case. He faced a charge of driving with excess alcohol. He pleaded not guilty. There were several adjournments, and a considerable delay. At the trial, and with no . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Consumer

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.443298

Dominus Rex v Woolston: 1732

The defendant having publish’d several discourses on the miracles of Christ, in which he maintain’d that the same are not to be taken in a literal sense, but that the whole relation of the life and miracles of our Lord Christ in the New Testament, is but an allegory, several informations were brought against him, in which it was laid, that the defendant published those discourses, with an intent to vilify and subvert the Christian religion ; and he being found guilty, Mr. Worley mov’d in arrest of judgment that those discouses did not amount to a libel upon Christianity, since the Scriptures are not deny’d, but oonstrued and taken in a different meaning from that they are usually understood in ; and by the same reason that making such a construction should be punishable by the common law, so it would have been punishable by the cornmon law, before the Reformation, to have taken the doctrine of transubstantiattion allegorically ; now as the common law has continued the same since the Reformstion that it was before, whatever was punishable by it before, continues so likewise since the Reformation ; so that this being not now a crime by the common law, nor was it before the Reformation, when it was held literally a part of Christianity ; neither is the allegory made by the defendant, by the same reason, a crime puniishable by the common law ; so that if this be a crime, it must be of ecclesiastical conusance ; and it may be of a very dangerous tendency to encourage prosecutions of this nature in the Temporal Courts, since it may give occasion to the carrying on of proseccutions for a rnere difference in opinion, which is tolerated by law. He urg’d, that the defendant ehould have been proceeded against upon the stat. 10 W, 3, cap. 32, by which, for denying Christianity, the first offence incapacitates the offender to hold any offiice, and c.
so that this Act having chalk’d out a special method of punishment, and being made
for the benefit of the subject, the defendant should be proceeded against according to its direction ; then he offer’d, that though it should be admitted, the discourses
did amount to a libel upon Christianity, yet the common law has not cognisance of suob an offence : but it being opposed, that this should now be made a question, it having been settled in Taylor’s Case 1 Vent. 293, and in other instances ’twas answer’d by Raymond Chief Justice : ~hL~~st~a~iity in general is parcel of the common law of
En land, and therefore to be protected by it ; now whatever strikes at the very root
the opin~on of my Lord Hale in Tmjlor’s andse: E663 so that to say, an attem~to
subvert the est~b~~~d religiou is not ~utiishab~e by those laws upon which it is
~~blish’d, is an absurdity j if this were an etitirely new case, X shouid not think
it a proper question to be made: I would have it taken rrotice of, that we do not
meddle with any differences in opinion, and that we interpose otrly where the very
root of ~h~stianity it seif is struck at, as it plainly is by this allegorical scheme,
the Kew Testament, and the whole relatiori of the life and miracles of Christ
being denied; and who can find this alIeg~r~.
As to the 9 8 10 W. 3, tis’ true, where a statute introduces a new law and ~1i3icts
a new punj~h~ent, it must be followed ; but where an Act of ParIiame~~t only inflicts
a new ~unish~ent for an off~~~ce at common law, it re~ains an o~et~ce still pu~~~shable
aa it wag before the Act; so ’tis in a case of forgery, which notw~~~stand~I~g the
5 Eliz, remains still pun~shab~e, asit was before that statute ; and with him agreed
the whole Court.
of 8 hristianity, tends ~anifestly to a dissolution of the civil goveriiment, and so was
13, EASTWICK ANT, CORE. Process sued out in the vacation. Vid. 1 Baund. 299.

Judges:

Raymond CJ

Citations:

[1732] EngR 87, (1732) Fitzg 64, (1732) 94 ER 655 (B)

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Approved – Taylor’s Case 1676
(Year?) An iriformatiori exhibited against him in the Crown Offce, for uttering of dlvers blasphemous expressions, horrible to hear, (viz.) that Jesus Christ was a bastard, a whoremaster, religion was a cheat ; and that he neither feared God, the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Ecclesiastical

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.387202

Welham v Director of Public Prosecutions: HL 1961

The House considered what was required to establish an ‘intent to defraud’.
Held: Lord Radcliffe said: ‘Now, I think that there are one or two things that can be said with confidence about the meaning of this word ‘ defraud ‘. It requires a person as its object: that is, defrauding involves doing something to someone. Although in the nature of things it is almost invariably associated with the obtaining of an advantage for the person who commits the fraud, it is the effect upon the person who is the object of the fraud that ultimately determines its meaning . . Secondly popular speech does not give, and I do not think ever has given, any sure guide as to the limits of what is meant by ‘to defraud’. It may mean to cheat someone. It may mean to practise a fraud upon someone. It may mean to deprive someone by deceit of something which is regarded as belonging to him or, though not belonging to him, as due to him or his right.’
Lord Denning distinguished between ‘intent to deceive’ and ‘intent to defraud’ by saying that the former conveyed the element of deceit which induced a state of mind ‘without the element of fraud which induces a course of action or inaction’. As to ‘a charge of fraud against that party was in issue’ under the 1933 Act: ”Fraud’ in ordinary speech means the using of false representations to obtain an unjust advantage . . Likewise in law ‘fraud’ is proved when it is shown that a false representation has been made knowingly or without belief in its truth, or recklessly, careless whether it be true or false, see Derry v Peek per Lord Herschell.’

Judges:

Lord Radcliffe, Lord Denning

Citations:

[1961] AC 103, [1960] 1 All ER 805, (1960) 44 Cr App R 124, [1960] 2 WLR 669

Statutes:

Forgery Act 1913 4, Administration of Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1933 6(3)(1)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Questioned – In re London and Globe Finance Corporation Ltd ChD 1903
A company which had gone from voluntary winding up, first to winding up under supervision and then to compulsory winding up, with the official receiver as liquidator. The company’s former managing director was suspected of fraud, but the law . .

Cited by:

Cited – Scott v Metropolitan Police Commissioner; Regina v Scott HL 20-Nov-1974
The defendant had been accused of conspiracy to produce pirate copies of films obtained by purchasing copies from cinema owners without the knowledge or consent of the copyright owners.
Held: To establish a conspiracy to defraud, it was not . .
Cited – Cavell USA, Inc and Randall v Seaton Insurance Company etc CA 16-Dec-2009
The parties had settled terms for concluding business arrangements between them. The agreement released and referred all claims in law and in equity ‘save for fraud’ to the UK courts. The respondents now wanted to bring a case alleging breach of a . .
Cited – Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd (T/A Crockfords) SC 25-Oct-2017
The claimant gambler sought payment of his winnings. The casino said that he had operated a system called edge-sorting to achieve the winnings, and that this was a form of cheating so as to excuse their payment. The system exploited tiny variances . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.324673

Rex v Joseph Jackson: 1822

12 judges decided by 8 to 4 that carnal knowledge of a woman whilst she was under the belief that the man is her husband was not rape.

Citations:

[1822] EngR 90, (1822) Russ and Ry 487, (1822) 168 ER 911 (A)

Links:

Commonlii

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Linekar CACD 21-Oct-1994
L appealed against his conviction for rape. His victim was a woman working as a prostitute. He said that he had simply made off afterwards without payment. He was convicted on the basis that he had procured the act by a false pretence by him that he . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.328983

Regina v William Jones And James MacDonell: 1850

In an indictment preferred at the assizes for a felony committed on the high seas, it is sufficient to allege that the offence was committed ‘on the high seas,’ without also
averring, that the offence was committed within the jurisdiction of the Admiralty.

Citations:

[1850] EngR 64, (1850) 2 Car and K 165, (1850) 175 ER 69

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.297411

Regina v Walter Noake: 1850

An indictment which contains three charges of embezzlement should not only aver that the monies which are the sublect. of the charges were received within six months, but should also aver that they were embezzled within six months

Citations:

[1850] EngR 63 (A), (1850) 2 Car and K 620

Links:

Commonlii

Crime

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.297410

Chafiq Ayadi v Council: ECFI 12 Jul 2006

ECJ Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures taken against persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaeda network and the Taliban – Competence of the Community – Freezing of funds – Fundamental rights – Jus cogens – Review by the Court – Action for annulment.

Citations:

T-253/02, [2006] EUECJ T-253/02

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Crime, Human Rights

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.243084

Hirst and Agu v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire: QBD 1987

The defendants were arrested after distributing leaflets outside a furriers, and appealed against convictions for obstructing the highway.
Held: The appeals succeeded. In deciding whether there was a lawful excuse for a technical obstruction of the highway, the Court rejected the test that a use of the highway which was not incidental to passing along it could not give rise to a lawful excuse, and applied the test whether the use of the highway (even though not incidental to passage) was reasonable or not.
Glidewell LJ said: ‘As counsel pointed out to us in argument, if that is not right, there are a variety of activities which quite commonly go on in the street which may well be the subject of prosecution under section 137. For instance, what is now relatively commonplace, at least in London and large cities, distributing advertising material or free periodicals outside stations, when people are arriving in the morning. Clearly, that is an obstruction; clearly, it is not incidental to passage up and down the street because the distributors are virtually stationary. The question must be: is it a reasonable use of the highway or not? In my judgment that is a question that arises. It may be decided that if the activity grows to an extent that it is unreasonable by reason of the space occupied or the duration of time for which it goes on that an offence would be committed, but it is a matter on the facts for the magistrates. magistrates, in my view.
To take another even more mundane example, suppose two friends meet in the street, not having seen each other for some time, and stop to discuss their holidays and are more or less stationary for a quarter of an hour or 20 minutes. Obviously, they may well cause an obstruction to others passing by. What they are discussing has nothing to do with passing or re-passing in the street. They could just as well have the conversation at the home of one or other of them or in a coffee shop nearby. Is it to be said that they are guilty of an offence and the reasonableness of what they are doing is not in issue? In my judgment it cannot be said.
Some activities which commonly go on in the street are covered by statute, for instance, the holding of markets or street trading, and thus they are lawful activities because they are lawfully permitted within the meaning of the section. That is lawful authority. But many are not and the question thus is (to follow Lord Parker’s dictum): have the prosecution proved in such cases that the defendant was obstructing the highway without lawful excuse? That question is to be answered by deciding whether the activity in which the defendant was engaged was or was not a reasonable use of the highway.
I emphasise that for there to be a lawful excuse for what would otherwise be an obstruction of the highway, the activity in which the person causing the obstruction is engaged must itself be inherently lawful. If it is not, the question whether it is reasonable does not arise. So an obstruction of the highway caused by unlawful picketing in pursuance of a trade dispute cannot be said to be an activity for which there is a lawful excuse. But in this case it is not suggested that the activity itself – distributing pamphlets an displaying banners in opposition to the wearing of animal furs as garments – was itself unlawful.’

Judges:

Glidewell LJ

Citations:

(1987) 85 Cr App R 143

Statutes:

Highways Act 1980 137(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Nagy v Weston QBD 1965
The defendant was prosecuted after selling hot dogs from a van parked on a busy street in Oxford. The court was asked when such would become an illegal obstruction.
Held: Such a use ‘could not . . be said to be incidental to the right to pass . .
Cited – Duncan v Jones KBD 1936
The appellant was about to make a public address in a situation in which the year before a disturbance had been incited by her speaking. A policeman believed reasonably that a breach of the peace would occur if the meeting was held, and ordered the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Jones and Lloyd HL 4-Mar-1999
21 people protested peacefully on the verge of the A344, next to the perimeter fence at Stonehenge. Some carried banners saying ‘Never Again,’ ‘Stonehenge Campaign 10 years of Criminal Injustice’ and ‘Free Stonehenge.’ The officer in charge . .
Cited – Smith, Regina (on the Application of) v The Land Registry (Peterborough Office) Admn 13-Feb-2009
The applicant sought judicial review of the cancellation of his application for first registration of land by adverse possession. The application had been rejected because a public right of way existed through it, and the claimant had not shown the . .
Cited – Jones and Lloyd v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 23-Jan-1997
The appellants had been peacefully protesting at Stonehenge. They were among others who refused to leave when ordered to do so under an order made by the police officer in charge declaring it to be a trespassory assembly under the 1986 Act. They . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Land

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.192190

Nagy v Weston: QBD 1965

The defendant was prosecuted after selling hot dogs from a van parked on a busy street in Oxford. The court was asked when such would become an illegal obstruction.
Held: Such a use ‘could not . . be said to be incidental to the right to pass and repass along the street.’
Lord Parker CJ said: ‘It is undoubtedly true – counsel for the appellant is quite right – that there must be proof that the user in question was an unreasonable use. Whether or not the user amounting to an obstruction is or is not an unreasonable use of the highway is a question of fact. It depends on all the circumstances, including the length of time the obstruction continues, the place where it occurs, the purpose for which it is done, and, of course, whether it does in fact cause an actual obstruction as opposed to a potential obstruction.’

Judges:

Lord Parker CJ

Citations:

[1965] 1 All ER 78, [1965] 1 WLR 280

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Applied – Hirst and Agu v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire QBD 1987
The defendants were arrested after distributing leaflets outside a furriers, and appealed against convictions for obstructing the highway.
Held: The appeals succeeded. In deciding whether there was a lawful excuse for a technical obstruction . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Jones and Lloyd HL 4-Mar-1999
21 people protested peacefully on the verge of the A344, next to the perimeter fence at Stonehenge. Some carried banners saying ‘Never Again,’ ‘Stonehenge Campaign 10 years of Criminal Injustice’ and ‘Free Stonehenge.’ The officer in charge . .
Cited – Jones and Lloyd v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 23-Jan-1997
The appellants had been peacefully protesting at Stonehenge. They were among others who refused to leave when ordered to do so under an order made by the police officer in charge declaring it to be a trespassory assembly under the 1986 Act. They . .
Cited – Scott v Mid-South Essex Justices and Keskin Admn 25-Mar-2004
The private prosecutor appealed against the dismissal by the magistrates of his allegation that the defendant had unlawfully obstructed the highway. In essence the question was whether Mr Keskin should have been found to have a lawful excuse. He . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Land

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.192191

Director of Public Prosecutions v Jones and Lloyd: HL 4 Mar 1999

21 people protested peacefully on the verge of the A344, next to the perimeter fence at Stonehenge. Some carried banners saying ‘Never Again,’ ‘Stonehenge Campaign 10 years of Criminal Injustice’ and ‘Free Stonehenge.’ The officer in charge concluded that they constituted a ‘trespassory assembly’ and told them so. When asked to move off, many did, but some, including the Appellants were determined to remain and put their rights to the test. They were later convicted.
Held: The appeal was allowed. A peaceful assembly on the highway, which did not unreasonably interfere with or obstruct the highway, was not a trespassory assembly. Old rules limiting lawful uses of the highway to passing and repassing, no longer apply and modern ranges of uses were wider. The existence of a public right of way entitled the public not merely to pass and repass, but may include the right of public assembly so long as such assembly does not unreasonably obstruct the highway.
(Lord Irvine; minority) The public might use and enjoy the highway for any reasonable purpose provided that the activity did not constitute a nuisance or obstruct the highway. Section 14A ‘brings into the arena of the criminal law the rights, if any, which the public have as against the occupier of the land in private law. It does so by enabling the police to take action against those taking part in an assembly if the occupier of the land would be entitled to treat the assembly as trespassing on his land. But the police may exercise their powers independently of the occupier, whose knowledge of or consent to the action which they are taking is not required.’ Public rights over land acquired by user or by dedication are limited as against the owner. They are granted or acquired for a particular purpose only, and they are not to be confused with the use of the land for other purposes.

Judges:

The Lord Chancellor Lord Slynn of Hadley Lord Hope of Craighead Lord Clyde Lord Hutton

Citations:

Times 05-Mar-1999, Gazette 17-Mar-1999, Gazette 31-Mar-1999, [1999] 2 AC 240, [1999] UKHL 5, [1999] 2 WLR 625, [1999] 2 All ER 257, (1999) 6 BHRC 513, (1999) 3 CHRLD 4

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Public Order Act 1986 14A 14B(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Ex parte Lewis (The Trafalgar Square Case) QBD 2-Jul-1888
L sought to assert a right to hold public meetings in Trafalgar Square.
Held: (obiter) There was no public right to occupy Trafalgar Square for the purpose of holding public meetings. The Commissioners of Works and Public Buildings (in whom . .
Applied – Harrison v Duke of Rutland CA 8-Dec-1893
H used a public highway crossing the defendant’s land, to disrupt grouse-shooting upon the defendant’s land. He complained after he had been forcibly restrained by the defendant’s servants from doing so. The defendant justified his actions saying . .
Cited – Hickman v Maisey CA 16-Mar-1900
A racing tout used the public highway which crossed the plaintiff’s property to watch racehorses being trained on the plaintiff’s land. On a particular occasion he walked backwards and forwards on a portion of the highway 15 yards long for a period . .
Appeal from – Jones and Lloyd v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 23-Jan-1997
The appellants had been peacefully protesting at Stonehenge. They were among others who refused to leave when ordered to do so under an order made by the police officer in charge declaring it to be a trespassory assembly under the 1986 Act. They . .
Cited – Nagy v Weston QBD 1965
The defendant was prosecuted after selling hot dogs from a van parked on a busy street in Oxford. The court was asked when such would become an illegal obstruction.
Held: Such a use ‘could not . . be said to be incidental to the right to pass . .
Cited – Hirst and Agu v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire QBD 1987
The defendants were arrested after distributing leaflets outside a furriers, and appealed against convictions for obstructing the highway.
Held: The appeals succeeded. In deciding whether there was a lawful excuse for a technical obstruction . .
Cited – Regina v Pratt 1855
‘I take it to be clear law that, if a man use the land over which there is a right of way for any purpose, lawful or unlawful, other than that of passing and repassing, he is a trespasser.’ . .
Cited – Regina v Cunningham Graham and Burns 1888
The court rejected a suggestion that there was a right of public meeting in Trafalgar Square or any other thoroughfare. ‘So far as I know the law of England, the use of public thoroughfares is for people to pass and repass along them. That is the . .
Cited – Attorney-General v Antrobus ChD 1905
The owner of Stonehenge had enclosed the monument by fencing for its protection. The Attorney-General wished to remove the fencing in order to keep the place open so that the public could visit it.
Held: The court rejected a suggestion that . .
Cited – Randall v Tarrant CA 1955
The defendant had crashed into the plaintiff’s parked vehicle as he tried to pass. The defendant denied negligece.
Held: A driver on a highway who sees a stationary vehicle has to take all possible care to avoid a collision. If there is . .
Cited – In re Ellenborough Park CA 15-Nov-1955
Qualifying Characteristics ofr Easement
Parties claimed a public right to wander through the grounds of the park.
Held: No such right could have been granted or was properly claimed. Lord Evershed MR said: ‘There is no doubt, in our judgment, but that Attorney-General v. Antrobus . .
Cited – Lowdens v Keaveney 1903
There had been a prosecution for wilfully preventing and interrupting the free passage of persons in a public street. There had been a procession with a band playing.
Held: It was a question of fact and degree whether such a use of the street . .
Cited – Attorney-General v Guardian Newspapers Ltd (No 2) (‘Spycatcher’) HL 13-Oct-1988
Loss of Confidentiality Protection – public domain
A retired secret service employee sought to publish his memoirs from Australia. The British government sought to restrain publication there, and the defendants sought to report those proceedings, which would involve publication of the allegations . .
Cited – Derbyshire County Council v Times Newspapers Ltd and Others HL 18-Feb-1993
Local Council may not Sue in Defamation
Local Authorities must be open to criticism as political and administrative bodies, and so cannot be allowed to sue in defamation. Such a right would operate as ‘a chill factor’ on free speech. Freedom of speech was the underlying value which . .
Cited – Derbyshire County Council v Times Newspapers Ltd and Others CA 19-Apr-1992
In two issues of ‘The Sunday Times’ newspaper on 17 and 24 September 1989 there appeared articles concerning share deals involving the superannuation fund of the Derbyshire County Council. The articles in the issue of 17 September were headed . .
Cited – Duke of Athol v Torrie 1849
. .
Cited – Mann v Brodie HL 1885
The court analysed the differences between Scottish and English land law with regard to rights acquired by prescription. Although in both countries a right of public way may be acquired by prescription, it was in England never practically necessary . .
Cited – MacPherson v Scottish Rights of Way and Recreation Society Ltd 1887
. .
Cited – Llandudno Urban District Council v Woods 1899
A clergyman set up a pulpit and was holding services and delivering addresses on the seashore.
Held: An injunction was refused. The court discouraged actions for trespass on public highways where the inteference was trivial. In this case, . .
Cited – Fielden v Cox 1906
The defendants had set up appliances on the highway for the purpose of catching moths.
Held: The court discouraged actions for minimal obstructions. . .
Cited – McAra v Magistrates of Edinburgh 1913
The pursuer challenged the rights of the Magistrates to issue a proclamation ordering that ‘persons shall not assemble or congregate or hold meetings’ in certain streets of the city unless they had been licensed to do so.
Held: They indeed had . .
Cited – Hubbard v Pitt CA 1976
Protesters handed out leaflets and carried posters outside the plaintiff’s estate agency. He claimed in trespass over the public footpath outside his premises. The defendants appealed the grant of an interlocutory injunction to prevent their . .
Cited – Wills Trustees v Cairngorm Canoeing and Sailing School HL 1976
The public right of navigation (PRN) is a right to public use of the river. The river may be used by the public for purposes of exercise and recreation as well as transport and commerce. At common law PRN cannot be lost by lack of use over time. ‘A . .
Cited – Liddle v Yorkshire (North Riding) County Council 1934
The court described the right of the public to use the highway: ‘. . it is well established that a highway must not be used in quite a different manner from passage along it and the pretext of walking up and down along it will not legitimise such a . .
Cited – Duncan v Jones KBD 1936
The appellant was about to make a public address in a situation in which the year before a disturbance had been incited by her speaking. A policeman believed reasonably that a breach of the peace would occur if the meeting was held, and ordered the . .
Cited – C (A Minor) v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 17-Mar-1995
The House considered whether the long established rule of the criminal law presuming that a child did not have a guilty mind should be set aside.
Held: Doli incapax, the presumption of a child’s lack of mens rea, is still effective and good . .

Cited by:

Cited – Oxfordshire County Council v Oxford City Council, Catherine Mary Robinson ChD 22-Jan-2004
Land had been registered in part as a common. The council appealed.
Held: The rights pre-existing the Act had not been lost. The presumption against retrospectively disapplying vested rights applied, and the application had properly been made. . .
Cited – Herrick and Another v Kidner and Another Admn 17-Feb-2010
Psychological Obstruction to Public Footpath
A public footpath crossed the appellants’ land. They constructed a gateway across it which they now accepted had been a significant obstruction of the right of way. The local authority served a notice requiring its removal, including the stone . .
Cited – Smith, Regina (on The Application of) v Land Registry (Peterborough Office) and Another CA 10-Mar-2010
The appellant had lived in a caravan on the verge of a byway and had been here for more than twelve years. He appealed against rejection of his request for possessory title. He said that there was no support in law for the maxim that adverse . .
Cited – N. Parsooramen and Co Ltd v Nahaboo and Others PC 29-Jun-2010
(Mauritius) . .
Cited – Mowan v London Borough of Wandsworth and Another CA 21-Dec-2000
The claimant tenant sought damages from the landlord and neighbour and fellow tenant for nuisance caused by the neighbour’s aberrant behaviour.
Sir Christopher Staughton said: ‘there is a strong trend in the cases in favour of the landlord who . .
Cited – Westminster City Council v Haw QBD 4-Oct-2002
The court was asked as to the interaction between the right and the duty of a local authority to remove obstructions from its highways, on the one hand, and the right of the individual citizen to use those highways to exercise his or her right to . .
Cited – Oxfordshire County Council v Oxford City Council and Another CA 24-Feb-2004
Application was made to register the ‘trap grounds’ as a village green.
Held: Carnwath LJ: ‘The 1965 Act created no new legal status, and no new rights or liabilities other than those resulting from the proper interpretation of section 10. . .
Cited – Scott v Mid-South Essex Justices and Keskin Admn 25-Mar-2004
The private prosecutor appealed against the dismissal by the magistrates of his allegation that the defendant had unlawfully obstructed the highway. In essence the question was whether Mr Keskin should have been found to have a lawful excuse. He . .
Cited – Hamilton v Dumfries and Galloway Council SCS 24-Feb-2009
The petitioner sought a declarator that an area of land on the edge of the village of Collin was not a ‘road’ capable of being added by the respondents, Dumfries and Galloway Council, to their list of public roads under section 16 of the 1984 Act. . .
Cited – City of London v Samede and Others QBD 18-Jan-2012
The claimant sought an order for possession of land outside St Paul’s cathedral occupied by the protestor defendants, consisting of ‘a large number of tents, between 150 and 200 at the time of the hearing, many of them used by protestors, either . .
Cited – Kind v Northumberland County Council Admn 14-Mar-2012
The appellant landowner had a public bridleway over his land. It passed over an old cattle grid. He had constructed a gate to the side of the track. It was not part of the public highway. He now appealed from a refusal of an order for the Council to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Land

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.158988

Regina v Paul: CA 26 Aug 1998

A firearm certificate was to be construed according to law, and not according to the particular factual situation. A certificate authorising holding a humane killer was no authority to hold a gun but was intended to be used for that purpose only.

Citations:

Gazette 26-Aug-1998, Times 17-Sep-1998

Statutes:

Firearms Act 1968 1 3(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.87531

Regina v Marsh: CACD 19 Jul 1996

Damage caused after the taking of a car need not be at the fault of the driver defendant for the offence of aggravated vehicle taking to have been committed by him. The sole requirement of the subsection was that the driving of the vehicle should have been the cause of the accident.It was not legitimate to require proof that the manner of the driving was the cause of the accident. Although section 12A(2)(a) required that the vehicle should have been driven dangerously, there was no corresponding requirement in the preceding subsections Once the basic offence of taking the vehicle had been established, no further fault was required.

Judges:

Laws J

Citations:

Times 19-Jul-1996, [1997] 1 Cr App R 67

Statutes:

Theft Act 1968 12A

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Hughes, Regina v SC 31-Jul-2013
Uninsured Driver Not Guilty of Causing Death
The appellant though an uninsured driver, was driving without fault when another vehicle veered across the road. The other driver died from his injuries, and the appellant convicted of causing his death whilst uninsured. At trial he succeeded in . .
Binding – Taylor, Regina v CACD 9-Apr-2014
. .
Cited – Taylor, Regina v SC 3-Feb-2016
No Liability Extension on Taking Without Consent
Appeal by leave of the Court of Appeal on a point of law arising in the course of the trial of the appellant for aggravated vehicle taking, contrary to section 12A of the Theft Act 1968. The defendant had taken a vehicle without the owner’s consent, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.87276

Regina v Williams (Roy): CACD 25 Oct 2000

There is a clear distinction between the appropriation which is an element of theft, and the obtaining in an offence of deception. In this case the defendant had over-billed for worked, and was accused of theft in respect of the presentation of the cheques given in payment of his bills. The case of Preddy did not apply. Appropriation is the assumption of the rights of an owner, and in respect of a cheque, this happened upon presentation. This differed from obtaining by deception where new choses had been obtained in circumstances where the deception was not clear.

Citations:

Times 25-Oct-2000

Statutes:

Theft Act 1968

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.85614

Regina v Chelmsford Crown Court, Ex Parte Farrer: CA 29 Mar 2000

A shotgun owner kept his guns locked in his mother’s house, and she had access to the key. She was not licensed. The police objected to the renewal saying she had access to them, and they were not therefore kept securely.
Held: The proper issue was for the potential licence holder to establish that the condition requiring security was satisfied. There was a clear breach of the section requiring the guns at all times to be under the control of the licensed holder. They were not stored securely.

Citations:

Times 29-Mar-2000, Gazette 06-Apr-2000

Statutes:

Firearms Rules 1989 (1989 No 854) 4(4)(iv)(a) 3(4)(iv)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina v Chelmsford Crown Court, Ex Parte Farrer QBD 27-Oct-1999
The licensed shotgun owner kept his guns locked in his mother’s house, and she knew the whereabouts of the key, but was not herself licensed. The police objected to the renewal saying she had access to them and they were not therefore kept securely. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing, Crime

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.85175

ADT v United Kingdom: ECHR 4 Aug 2000

The UK law which had the effect of prohibiting non-violent homosexual acts by groups of males, was a violation of the right to respect for his private life. The law went beyond that which might properly be required in a democratic society for the protection of morals or health or the rights and freedoms of others.
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8; Not necessary to examine Art. 14; Pecuniary damage – financial award; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses award

Citations:

Times 04-Aug-2000, 35765/97, [2000] ECHR 401, [2000] ECHR 402, [2010] ECHR 1892

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii, Bailii

Statutes:

Sexual Offences Act 1967 1, Sexual Offences Act 1956 13, European Convention on Human Rights Art 8

Cited by:

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

Crime, Human Rights

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.77656

Regina v Lewis: 1869

The defendants were convicted of conspiring to obtain money by divers false pretences and deceptive practices.

Citations:

(1869) 11 Cox CC 404

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Norris v United States of America and others HL 12-Mar-2008
The detainee appealed an order for extradition to the USA, saying that the offence (price-fixing) was not one known to English common law. The USA sought his extradition under the provisions of the Sherman Act.
Held: It was not, and it would . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.270742

Taylor’s Case: 1676

(Year?) An iriformatiori exhibited against him in the Crown Offce, for uttering of dlvers blasphemous expressions, horrible to hear, (viz.) that Jesus Christ was a bastard, a whoremaster, religion was a cheat ; and that he neither feared God, the devil, or man.
Beirig upon his trial, he acknowleclged the speaking of the words, except the word bastard ; and for the rest, he pretended to mean them in another sense than they ordinarily bear, (viz.) whoremaster, i.e. that Christ was master of the whore of Babylon, and such kind of evasions for the rest. But all the words being proved by several witnesses, he was found guilty.
And Hale said, that such kind of wicked blasphemous words were not only an offence to God and religion, but a crime against the laws, State and Government, and therefore punishable in this Court. For to say, religion is a cheat, is to dissolve all those obligations whereby the civil societies are preserved, arid that Christianity is parcel of the laws of England ; and therefore to reproach the Christian religion is to speak in subversion of the law.
Wherefore they gave judgment upon him, (viz.) to stand iri the pillory in three several places, and to pay one thousand marks fine, and to find sureties for his good behaviour during life.
An attack on Christian beliefs would undermine and endanger society: ‘For to say that religion is a cheat is to dissolve all those obligations whereby the civil societies are preserved and that Christianity is a parcel of the laws of England and therefore to reproach Christianity is to speak in subversion of the law.’ and ‘Contumelious reproaches of God and of the religion established are punishable here…. the Christian religion is part of the law itself’.

Judges:

Sir Matthew Hale

Citations:

(1676) 3 Keb 607, [1726] EngR 773, (1726) 1 Vent 293, (1726) 86 ER 189 (C)

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Green, Regina (on the Application of) v The City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court, Thoday, Thompson Admn 5-Dec-2007
The claimant appealed from the refusal by the magistrate to issue summonses for the prosecution for blashemous libel of the Director General of the BBC and the producers of a show entitled ‘Jerry Springer – The Opera.’
Held: The gist of the . .
Cited – Corway v Independent Newspapers (Ireland) Limited 30-Jul-1999
(Supreme Court of Ireland) . .
Approved – Dominus Rex v Woolston 1732
The defendant having publish’d several discourses on the miracles of Christ, in which he maintain’d that the same are not to be taken in a literal sense, but that the whole relation of the life and miracles of our Lord Christ in the New Testament, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Ecclesiastical

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.261809

Sedley’s case: 1675

The defendant Sir Charles Sedley showed himself naked on the balcony of a house in Covent Garden in the presence of several people and urinated on them. He was indicted at common law for outraging public decency and pleaded guilty, the magistrate ruling that: ‘Not withstanding that there was not any Star Chamber, yet they would leave him to know that the Court of King’s Bench was the custos morum of all the King’s subjects and that it was then high time to punish such profane actions, committed against all modesty, when they were as frequent as if not only Christianity but morality also had been neglected.’

Citations:

(1675) Strange 168, [1675] 1 Sid 168

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

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: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.258775

Rex v Steane: 1947

The defendant was charged with an offence requiring an ‘ulterior intent’, which he denied having.
Held: Lord Goddard discussed the direction to the jury: ‘if on the totality of the evidence there is room for more than one view as to the intent of the prisoner, the jury should be directed that it is for the prosecution to prove the intent to the jury’s satisfaction, and if, on review of the whole evidence, they either think the intent did not exist or they are left in doubt as to the intent, the prisoner is entitled to be acquitted.’

Judges:

Lord Goddard

Citations:

[1947] KB 997, [1947] 1 All ER 813

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Morgan HL 30-Apr-1975
The defendants appealed against their convictions for rape, denying mens rea and asserting a belief (even if mistaken) that the victim had consented.
Held: For a defence of mistake to succeed, the mistake must have been honestly made and need . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.258674

Selby v Director of Public Prosecutions: HL 1972

The House, by a majority, discounted the significance of the requirement in the statute for an act ‘with intent to defraud’. The word ‘uttering’ involved inherently a fraudulent intent.

Citations:

[1972] AC 515

Statutes:

Coinage Offences Act 1936 5(6)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Heron; Regina v Storey; Regina v Thomas HL 25-Mar-1982
The defendants appealed against their convictions for conspiracy to counterfeit gold coins. They said no evidence had been brought to suggest their intention to commit any dishonest act. The House was asked whether the offence was one of specific or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.258440

Rex v Goodwin: 1944

Humphreys J held that: ‘While it is not necessary that a person should be arrested at the place where it is alleged that he was found about to commit an offence, there is no doubt from the language of the section that it is necessary that he should be found – even if ‘found’ means no more than discovered or seen – in such circumstances as to satisfy the court that he was then and there about to commit an offence.’

Judges:

Humphreys J

Citations:

[1944] 1 All ER 506

Statutes:

Prevention of Crimes Act 1871

Cited by:

Cited – L v Crown Prosecution Service Admn 16-Jul-2007
The defendant, a youth, apealed his conviction under the 1824 Act of being found on enclosed premises for an unlawful purpose.
Held: No unlawful purpose had been shown and the conviction was quashed. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.259201

Regina v Hensler: 1870

The accused attempted to obtain money by false pretences by sending a letter. The recipient was not deceived.
Held: An attempt to obtain money by a false pretence which is not in fact believed, is criminal notwithstanding that the consequences intended were not achieved. The accused had done all that he could do toward commission of the crime but final commission of the crime had been prevented by the conduct of the victim.

Citations:

(1870) 11 Cox Crim Cas 570

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Haughton v Smith, On Appeal From Regina v Smith (Roger) HL 21-Nov-1973
The defendant appealed against his conviction for attempting to handle stolen goods. They were to be delivered to him in a van, but the meat was intercepted and recovered by the police. The defendant argued that he should not be convicted of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.254553

Regina v Pimm: 1994

The offence of motor manslaughter is generally reserved for situations where on the facts there is a very high risk of the driving resulting in death.

Citations:

[1994] RTR 391

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Shepherd; Regina v Wernet; Attorney General’s References Nos. 14 and 24 of 1993 CACD 26-Jan-1994
New sentencing guidelines were handed down for the offence of causing death by dangerous driving whilst driving with excess alcohol. The definition and sentence for the offence had been changed. Lord Taylor CJ: ‘Drivers who drive after taking . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Road Traffic

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.251431

Board of Trade v Owen: HL 1957

The defendants appealed their convictions under common law for a conspiracy to defraud. The conspiracy was within the jurisdiction but the intended fraudulent acts would happen in Germany. The Court of Appeal quashed the convictions for conspiracy.
Held: The House rejected the prosecutor’s appeal on the basis that a conspiracy to commit a crime abroad is not indictable in England unless the contemplated crime is one for which an indictment would lie here. The offence of conspiracy is an attempt to anticipate the substantive offence before even an attempt, and so is essential to keeping the peace. Lord Tucker approved a passage from the Court of Appeal considering section 4 of the 1861 Act: ‘Referring to section 4 of the Offences Against the Person Act, 1861, which makes a conspiracy in this country to murder any person abroad whether within the Queen’s domains or not, and whether the person is or is not a subject of the Queen, a misdemeanour punishable with a maximum of 10 years’ imprisonment, the court observed that as at any rate since 33 Henry 8, c.23, a British subject had been indictable in this country for murder committed abroad and the Offences Against the Person Act, 1828, expressly provided for the trial of any of His Majesty’s subjects charged in England with murder committed on land out of the United Kingdom, whether within the King’s dominions or without, it followed that being an accessory to murder abroad or conspiracy to murder abroad was triable here. They were accordingly of opinion that section 4 of the Act of 1861 did not alter the common law but provided a special penalty and made it clear that such a conspiracy by anyone in this country was indictable. This reasoning was not contested before your Lordships by either side and is clearly right.’ Lord Tucker: ‘I have reached the conclusion that the decision of the Court of Appeal that a conspiracy to commit a crime abroad is not indictable in this country unless the contemplated crime is one for which an indictment would lie here is correct.’

Judges:

Lord Tucker

Citations:

[1957] AC 602

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Abu Hamza CACD 28-Nov-2006
The defendant had faced trial on terrorist charges. He claimed that delay and the very substantial adverse publicity had made his fair trial impossible, and that it was not an offence for a foreign national to solicit murders to be carried out . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.247646

Regina v Burke: HL 24 May 1990

The defendants appealed against their conviction under the 1977 Act.
Held: To amount to harrassment, the actions complained of need not be such as would give rise of themselves to civil or criminal action.

Citations:

[1991] 1 AC 135, Independent 24-May-1990

Statutes:

Protection from Eviction Act 1977 1(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Upheld – Regina v Yuthiwattana CACD 1984
The defendant appealed against his convictions under the 1977 Act.
Held: Under section 1(2) the deprivation of occupation for one day was insufficient. To constitute an offence, the deprivation had to take the character of an eviction. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant, Crime

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.245855

Regina (W) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis and Another: CA 11 May 2006

The Commissioner appealed against a declaration that an authorisation given for creation of a dispersal area was unlawful.
Held: The proceedings appeared at first to be merely hypothetical, but the issue as to whether a police officer had use reasonable force to remove a child from a dspersal area was a live issue of general public concern. The word ‘remove’ in s 30(6) carried a coercive power, and therefore a police officer, and other similarly empowered by the Act, could use reasonable force to achieve the purpose of the Act.

Judges:

Judge LJ, May LJ, Wall LJ

Citations:

Times 22-May-2006

Statutes:

Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003 30(6)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina on the Application of PW v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis, The London Borough of Richmond-Upon-Thames Admn 20-Jul-2005
W, a child of 14 sought judicial review of an order to remove persons under the age of 16 from dispersal areas in Richmond.
Held: The issue was whether the power given to police to remove youths was permissive or coercive. The power given ‘is . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State Home Dept ex parte Wynne HL 17-Mar-1993
A prisoner wishing to appear at court in civil proceedings needed under the Act to apply for his own production to court, and to make arrangement for payment of the costs of being produced at court.
Held: A Legislature could so provide even . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Crime

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.242872

B v Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs and the Lord Chancellor: CA 2003

On an application for an interim anti-social behaviour order, the court must consider whether the application for a final order has been properly made.

Judges:

Kennedy LJ

Citations:

[2003] 1 All ER 531

Statutes:

Crime and Disorder Act 1998

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Manchester City Council v Muir and Another CA 20-Mar-2006
An interim anti-social behaviour order had been obtained against an 11 and a half year old boy in the county court, and an injunction sought against his mother under the 1996 Act. The defence had questioned whether there had been the required . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.241564

Williams v Phillips: CCA 1956

Dustbinmen appealed against their convictions for the larceny of refuse as they removed it from commercial premises. Their employers had posted notices which provided that any proceeds from selling refuse had to be shared with the corporation, and warned of criminal prosecutions. The defendants had collected and sold on sacks of rags and wool they had carried on the dustcarts. In one case the sack was shown to have been corporation property.
Held: The appeals failed. The original owner had not abandoned the refuse by placing it outside his premises for collection. It remained there for the purpose of awaiting collection by the corporation. On collection it passed into the constructive possession of the local authority. Given the defendants’ knowlege of the notices and of the agreements made, they had sufficient animus furandi.
Goddard LCJ said: ‘The first point that is taken here, that the property was abandoned, is on the face of it untenable. Of course, that is not so. If I put refuse in my dustbin outside my house, I am not abandoning it in the sense that I am leaving it for anybody to take away. I am putting it out so that it may be collected and taken away by the local authority, and until it has been taken away by the local authority it is my property. It is my property and I can take it back and prevent anybody else from taking it away. It is simply put there for the Corporation [the employer of the dustmen] or the local authority, as the case may be, to come and clear it away. Once the Corporation come and clear it away, it seems to me that because I intended it to pass from myself to them, it becomes their property. Therefore, there is no ground for saying that this is abandoned property. As long as the property remains on the owner’s premises, it cannot be abandoned property. It is a wholly untenable proposition to say that refuse which a householder puts out to taken away is abandoned. Very likely he does not want it himself and that is why he puts it in the dustbin. He puts it in the dustbin, not so that anybody can come along and take it, but so that the Corporation can come along and take it.’

Judges:

Goddard LCJ

Citations:

(1956) 121 JP 163, [1957] 41 Crim App Rep 5

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.242138

Towers and Co Ltd v Gray: 1961

The term ‘possession’ has been the source of constant difficulty of interpretation, and must be construed in the particular context.

Judges:

Lord Parker CJ

Citations:

[1961] 2 QB 361

Cited by:

Cited – Warner v Metropolitan Police Commissioner HL 1968
The appellant had been convicted of an offence contrary to section 1 of the 1964 Act, of having been found in possession of drugs.
Held: (Reid dissenting) The prosecution had only to prove that the accused knew of the existence of the thing . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.242677

Burns v Ransley: 1949

(High Court of Australia) An Australian citizen, was convicted of uttering seditious words, contrary to Section 24 of the Crimes Act 1914-1946. Under S24B seditious words were words expressive of a seditious intention, and a seditious intention, by virtue of Section 24A included, amongst other things, an intention to excite disaffection against the Government or Constitution of the Commonwealth [of Australia].
Held: The court was divided as to whether the necessary intention was present on the facts. Rich J: ‘Disaffection connotes enmity and hostility, estranged allegiance, disloyalty, hostility to constituted authority or to a particular form of political government’. reflecting the dictionary definition of disaffection. Latham CJ stated that ”disaffection’ in the context in which it is used means more . . than political opposition.’

Judges:

Latham CJ, Rich J

Citations:

[1949] 79 CLR 101

Cited by:

Cited – Secretary of State for the Home Department v Hicks CA 12-Apr-2006
The claimant was held as a suspected terrorist by the US government in Guantanamo Bay. He had Australian citizenship but qualified also for British citizenship. He had sought that citizenship and protection. The secretary of state appealed an order . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Crime

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.240382

Regina v Thomas and Thomson: 1976

The word ‘suffers’ adds nothing to to the word ‘permits’ in the context of preises being used for the consumption of unlawful drugs, since each carries the same meaning.

Citations:

(1976) 63 Cr App R 65

Statutes:

Misuse of Drugs Act 1971

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Bett CACD 12-Oct-1998
A conviction under section 8(b) for permitting premises to be used for the supply of controlled drugs was correct without evidence of knowledge of the particular drug supplied even though particular drugs were named in the indictments. The section . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.237679

Regina v Raven: CACD 1982

The 22-year old defendant had a mental age of 9 years. He said it was inappropriate when judging the availability of the defence of provocation to a charge of murder to ignore that fact. The Recorder of London ruled that, having regard to the test of the reasonable man in Camplin, in order to attribute to the reasonable man the age and other characteristics of the accused the jury should be directed to consider the reasonable man as having lived the same life as the accused of 22 years but with the retarded development and mental age of the accused.

Citations:

[1982] Crim LR 51

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Her Majestys Attorney General for Jersey v Holley PC 15-Jun-2005
(Jersey) The defendant appealed his conviction for murder, claiming a misdirection on the law of provocation. A chronic alcoholic, he had admitted killing his girlfriend with an axe. Nine law lords convened to seek to reconcile conflicting decisions . .
Cited – Luc Thiet Thuan v The Queen PC 2-Apr-1996
(Hong Kong) On a trial for murder the defendant relied on the defences of diminished responsibility and provocation. Medical evidence showed the defendant suffered from brain damage and was prone to respond to minor provocation by losing his . .
Cited – Regina v Parker CACD 25-Feb-1997
The defendant appealed his conviction for murder, saying that his defence of provocation should have been left for the jury.
Held: Not following Luc, it was open to admit relevant evidence on the defendant’s capacity for self-control. Having . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.228011

Regina v Welsh: 1869

The judge directed the jury as to provocation saying that in order to reduce the crime to manslaughter, there should have been serious provocation, ‘something which might naturally cause an ordinary and reasonably minded man to lose his self-control and commit such an act’.

Judges:

Keating J

Citations:

[1869] 11 Cox CC 336

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Her Majestys Attorney General for Jersey v Holley PC 15-Jun-2005
(Jersey) The defendant appealed his conviction for murder, claiming a misdirection on the law of provocation. A chronic alcoholic, he had admitted killing his girlfriend with an axe. Nine law lords convened to seek to reconcile conflicting decisions . .
Cited – Regina v Smith (Morgan James) HL 27-Jul-2000
The defendant had sought to rely upon the defence of provocation. He had suffered serious clinical depression.
Held: When directing a jury on the law of provocation, it was no longer appropriate to direct the jury to disregard any particular . .
Cited – Rex v Lesbini 1914
The test of provocation in a murder allegation, is not whether the occurrence is sufficient to deprive the particular individual in question of his self-control, having regard to his nature and idiosyncrasies, but whether it would suffice to deprive . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.228010

Rex v Grinberg: 1917

Citations:

(1917) 33 Times L R 428

Cited by:

Cited – Woolmington v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 23-May-1935
Golden Thread of British Justice – Proof of Intent
The appellant had been convicted of the murder of his wife. She had left him and returned to live with her mother. He went to the house. He said he intended to frighten her that he would kill himself if she did not return. He wired a shotgun to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.223131

Rex v Ensor: 1887

‘In the history of the Star Chamber it is said:- ‘In all ages libels have been most severely punished in this court, but most especially they began to be frequent about 42 and 43 Elizabeth, (1600, when Sir Edward Coke was her Attorney General).
‘In this passage therefore he was probably giving his impression of the Star Chamber practice, which no one would now regard as of any authority. There are, I think, many instances in which Lord Coke’s views of the criminal law are doubtful and go far beyond the authorities he refers to. In this passage he refers to none.’ The court then considered the ‘only real’ authority, R v Topham. and said; ‘The judgment seems to me to show that a mere vilifying of the deceased is not enough… There must be a vilifying of the dead with a view to injure his posterity. The dead have no rights and can suffer no wrongs. The living alone can be the subject of legal protection, and the law of libel is intended to protect them, not against every writing which gives them pain, but against writings holding them up individually to hatred, contempt or ridicule. This, no doubt, may be done in every variety of way. It is possible, under the mask of attacking a dead man, to attack a living one…..I wish to add that I regard the silence of the authorities and the general practice of the profession as a more weighty authority on this point than the isolated statements of Lord Coke and the few unsatisfactory cases referred to in R v Topham. I am reluctant in the highest degree to extend the criminal law. To speak broadly, to libel the dead is not an offence known to our law.’

Judges:

Stephen J

Citations:

(1887) 3 TLR 366

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Defamation, Crime

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.221967

Rex v Rule: 1937

A constituent wrote to his MP asking for assistance to lodge a complaint to the appropriate MP concerning the conduct of a public official in that consituency.
Held: Qualified privilege was a defence to a criminal charge of defamatory libel.

Citations:

[1937] 2 KB 375

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Defamation, Crime

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.221966

Stobo v HM Advocate: HCJ 1993

Citations:

1993 SCCR 1105

Cited by:

Overruled – Smith v Lees HCJ 1997
Evidence of distress could not corroborate the carrying out of physical acts of indecent assault, though it can still be used to corroborate, in an appropriate case, evidence of a lack of consent on the part of the complainer to the accused’s . .
Cited – Paul Cullington v Her Majesty’s Advocate HCJ 25-Jun-1999
The defendant appealed his conviction for indecent assault. He challenged the use of evidence of distress as corroboration of an allegation that violence had been threatened or used.
Held: The appeal failed. There was no reason to distinguish . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Scotland, Criminal Evidence

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.220739

Regina v Landy; Regina v White etc: CACD 1982

The defendants appealed against convictions for conspiracy to defraud. The three were bank employees including the chairman, and between them managed to take money from the bank by different forms of malpractice. The defendants denied dishonesty, saying that the acts identified were recklessness rather than dishonesty.
Held: The indictment alleging ‘divers false and fraudulent devise’ was a relic of the past. A defendant was entitled to know just what allegations were made against him. The judge had failed to direct the jury of the need to find that the defendants had agreed to act dishonestly, and the appeal was allowed.
Lawton LJ said: ‘There is always a danger that a jury may think that proof of an irregularity followed by loss is proof of dishonesty. The dishonesty to be proved must be in the minds and intentions of the defendants. It is to their states of mind that the jury must direct their attention. What the reasonable man or the jurors themselves would have believed or intended in the circumstances in which the defendants found themselves is not what the jury have to decide, but what a reasonable man or they themselves would have believed or intended in similar circumstances may help them to decide what in fact individual defendants believed or intended. An assertion by a defendant that throughout a transaction he acted honestly does not have to be accepted but has to be weighed like any other piece of evidence. If that was the defendant’s state of mind, or may have been, he is entitled to be acquitted. But if the jury, applying their own notions of what is honest and what is not, conclude that he could not have believed that he was acting honestly, then the element of dishonesty will have been established. What a jury must not do is to say to themselves: ‘If we had been in his place we would have known we were acting dishonestly so he must have known he was.’ What they can say is: ‘We are sure he was acting dishonestly because we can see no reason why a man of his intelligence and experience would not have appreciated, as right minded people would have done, that what he was doing was dishonest.”

Judges:

Lawton LJ,

Citations:

[1981] 1 WLR 355, [1981] 1 All ER 1172

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Explained – Regina v Feely CACD 1973
In relation to a charge of theft where the issue of dishonesty is raised, the issue must be left to the jury. Dishonesty is not a matter of law, but a jury question of fact and standards. Except to the limited extent that section 2 of the Theft Act . .

Cited by:

Considered – Regina v Ghosh CACD 5-Apr-1982
The defendant surgeon was said to have made false claims for payment for operations, and was charged under the 1968 Act. He claimed to have been entitled to the sums claimed, and denied that he had been dishonest. The court considered the meaning of . .
Cited – Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd (T/A Crockfords) SC 25-Oct-2017
The claimant gambler sought payment of his winnings. The casino said that he had operated a system called edge-sorting to achieve the winnings, and that this was a form of cheating so as to excuse their payment. The system exploited tiny variances . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.214621

Regina v McIvor: CA 1982

The defendant had been refused a loan by his employers. He took the money anyway from the till and repaid it. On discovery he was charged with theft. He denied that he had been dishonest. He had always intended to repay it and had done so. He appealed from a direction from the judge that his own state of mind was neither here nor there.
Held: The meaning of dishonesty has both objective and subjective elements. The jury should use their own standards of honesty to see first whether the act was objectively dishonest. They should also allow for evidence from the defendant as to his state of mind. Though there had been a misdirection, there was no substantial injustice in this case, and the conviction stood.

Citations:

[1982] 1 WLR 409, [1982] 1 All ER 491

Statutes:

Theft Act 1968 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Explained – Regina v Greenstein; Regina v Green CACD 1975
Meaning of dishonesty under the 1968 Act. . .
Considered – Regina v Feely CACD 1973
In relation to a charge of theft where the issue of dishonesty is raised, the issue must be left to the jury. Dishonesty is not a matter of law, but a jury question of fact and standards. Except to the limited extent that section 2 of the Theft Act . .

Cited by:

Dicta disapproved – Regina v Ghosh CACD 5-Apr-1982
The defendant surgeon was said to have made false claims for payment for operations, and was charged under the 1968 Act. He claimed to have been entitled to the sums claimed, and denied that he had been dishonest. The court considered the meaning of . .
Cited – Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd (T/A Crockfords) SC 25-Oct-2017
The claimant gambler sought payment of his winnings. The casino said that he had operated a system called edge-sorting to achieve the winnings, and that this was a form of cheating so as to excuse their payment. The system exploited tiny variances . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.214619

Alexander MacGrowther’s Case: 1746

In the rule that necessity might be a defence to a criminal charge, the distinction was drawn between threats directed against the person and threats upon property. ‘The only force that doth excuse is a force upon the person, and present fear of death ; and this force and fear must continue all the time the party remains with the rebels. It is incumbent on every man, who makes force his defence, to show an actual force, and that he quitted the service as soon as he could.’

Judges:

Lee CJ

Citations:

[1746] Fost 13, [1746] EngR 782, (1746) Fost 13, (1746) 168 ER 8

Links:

Commonlii

Cited by:

Cited – Attorney-General v Whelan 20-Dec-1933
(Court of Criminal Appeal – Ireland) The appellant had been tried as part of a conspiracy to steal and to receive stolen good. He was acquitted of the conspiracy, but now appealed against his conviction for theft despite his assertion that he acted . .
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.213663

Regina v Berry (No 2): 1991

Citations:

[1991] 2 All ER 789

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Smith (Wallace Duncan), Regina v (No 4) CACD 17-Mar-2004
The defendant appealed convictions for fraudulent trading and obtaining property by deception, saying that the English court could not prosecute an offence committed principally in the US.
Held: Provided some substantial element (here the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.196569

Re X, Petitioner: 1995

Citations:

1995 SCCR 407

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Cited by:

Cited – Gary Follen v Her Majesty’s Advocate PC 8-Mar-2001
PC High Court of Justiciary (Scotland) The defendant said that a trial under the section infringed his right to a fair trial, because of a ten month delay by the prosecutor. On arrest he had been recalled to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.195988

Rukwira v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 1993

There was a fracas on the landing in a council block of flats. Access to the landing was gained by an entry phone system controlled by the, occupants of the individual self contained flats. The question for the Divisional Court was whether the communal landing fell within the definition of a dwelling under section 8.
Held: Macpherson J said that the answer to the question had to be found by focusing carefully on the statutory definition. He held that the common parts in issue in that case were the means of access to the living accommodation, but they were not part of the dwelling itself, that they were not part of the structure occupied as a person’s home, and they could not properly be described as living accommodation because the householder lived inward of the front door, and not outward onto the common landing.

Judges:

Kennedy LJ, Macpherson J

Citations:

[1993] Crim LR 1882

Statutes:

Public Order Act 1986 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.594663

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.

Judges:

Lord Abernethy And Lord Justice Clerk And Lord Osborne

Citations:

2003 SLT 1119

Links:

ScotC

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

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 . .
Appeal from – Holland v Her Majesty’s Advocate IHCS 16-Jun-2004
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.191036

Taylor, Regina v: SC 13 Nov 2019

(Redacted) The court was asked to consider the meaning of ‘torture’ from events in a rebellion in Liberia in 1990. The CACD certified the following point of law of general public importance: ‘What is the correct interpretation of the term ‘person acting in an official capacity’ in section 134(1) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988; in particular does it include someone who acts otherwise than in a private and individual capacity for or on behalf of an organisation or body which exercises or purports to exercise the functions of government over the civilian population in the territory which it controls and in which the relevant conduct occurs?’
Held: The appeal was allowed: ‘the prosecution is correct in its interpretation of article 1 UNCAT and section 134 CJA. I consider that the words of those provisions in their ordinary meaning support this reading. They are sufficiently wide to include conduct by a person acting in an official capacity on behalf of an entity exercising governmental control over a civilian population in a territory over which it exercises de facto control. In particular, I can see no justification for imposing the limitation on those words for which the appellant contends, which would require the conduct to be on behalf of the government of the State concerned. On the contrary, the words in their ordinary meaning are apt to include conduct on behalf of a de facto authority which seeks to overthrow the government of the State.’

Judges:

Baroness Hale of Richmond PSC, Lord Reed DPSC, Lord Wilson, Lord Hodge, Lord Lloyd-Jones JJSC

Citations:

[2020] 1 Cr App R 19, [2019] UKSC 51, [2019] WLR(D) 648, [2020] HLR 8, (2020) 171 BMLR 37, [2020] 2 All ER 477, [2019] WLR(D) 638, [2019] 3 WLR 1073, 49 BHRC 132, [2021] AC 349, [2020] Crim LR 560

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1988 134, Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 36, United Nations Convention against Torture

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Bartle and Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Others, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte; Regina v Evans and Similar (No 3) HL 24-Mar-1999
An application to extradite a former head of state for an offence which was not at the time an offence under English law would fail, but could proceed in respect of allegations of acts after that time. No immunity was intended for heads of state. . .
Cited – Jones v Ministry of Interior for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and others HL 14-Jun-2006
The claimants said that they had been tortured by Saudi police when arrested on false charges. They sought damages, and appealed against an order denying jurisdiction over the defendants. They said that the allegation of torture allowed an exception . .
Cited – EO and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department Admn 17-May-2013
. .
Cited – Medical Justice and Others v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Another Admn 10-Oct-2017
Contention that the SSHD, had issued unlawful statutory Guidance, and policies, albeit for the lawful purpose of preventing those who are more vulnerable to harm in immigration detention from entering immigration detention, or for removing them from . .
Appeal from – Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v DL and Another (HB) UTAA 28-Aug-2018
Housing and Council Tax Benefits – Payments That Are Eligible for HB . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.648565

Regina v Hazeltine: 1967

Citations:

[1967] 51 Cr App R 351

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v James, SJ CACD 4-Oct-1995
The defendant had been accused of dangerous driving. He entered a plea of guilty to driving without due care, but that was not acceptable to the prosecution. He was acquitted of the more serious charge and the judge purported to sentence him on the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.183172

Regina v Wall: 1974

The charge was fraudulent evasion of the restriction on importation of dangerous drugs. For that offence to be committed, the drugs in question must necessarily arrive in this country.
Held: If sending a letter from abroad to England containing false pretences constituted an offence punishable here, so must taking part in the dispatch of drugs to England with a view to evading a restriction on their import.

Citations:

[1974] 59 Crim App R 58, [1974] 1 WLR 930

Citing:

Cited – Treacy v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 1970
Blackmail was alleged under section 21 of the 1968 Act, the letter making the unwarranted demand with menaces having been posted from England to an intended victim in Germany.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. To allow an English court to have . .
Cited – Regina v Baxter 1972
The charge was attempting to obtain property by deception by posting letters from Northern Ireland to pools promoters in England. The demand had arrived in England and had been intended to do damage there.
Held: ‘The attempt to obtain the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Goatley v The Governor of HM Prison Brixton and the Government of the Netherlands QBD 20-Jun-2002
The second respondent sought the extradition of the applicant for trial for drugs offences. He said that the alleged offences were extra terratorial to the second defendant, but that extradition was restricted to intra territorial offences.
Cited – Regina v Manning CACD 24-Jun-1998
The defendant appealed his conviction for obtaining property by deception where part of the offence had taken place abroad.
Held: Smith should be overturned. The last act or terminatory theory remains the binding common law of England and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.183178

Regina v Miller and Glennie; Miller v- Glennie: 1983

The question was whether or not the litigants had incurred liability for costs in cases in which they had been supported by their employer.
Held: Where the solicitor is on the record for the client in the litigation, there is a rebuttable presumption that the client is liable to pay his solicitors.

Judges:

Lloyd J

Citations:

[1983] 1 WLR 1056, [1983] 1 All ER 978

Cited by:

Cited – Miskin, Miskin v St John Vaughan SCCO 18-Sep-2002
The claimants resisted an order to pay the VAT element awarded on the defendant’s legal costs. The revenue had been unable to state clearly whether the defendant would be able to recover VAT, in which case it would not be payable, or the reverse. It . .
Cited – Meretz Investments Nv and Another v ACP Ltd and others ChD 14-Nov-2007
The parties disputed the success of a sale by a mortgagee in possession of various properties. The parties disputed the apportionment of costs.
Held: The appeal failed. Where there is no express agreement concerning the division of costs, a . .
Cited – Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis v Logan EAT 31-Oct-2002
The applicant police officer sought an order for his costs. The Commissioner objected, saying that since his costs were being met by the Police Federation, he himself had no costs to claim.
Held: ‘I cannot see that this case differs in any way . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Costs

Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.182889

Attorney-General’s Reference (No 6 of 1980): CACD 1981

The court considered a reference on a point of law as to whether consent could be a defence to a charge of assault arising out of a fight in a public place to which the other party consented.
Held: Lord Lane CJ said: ‘It is not in the public interest that people should try to cause, or should cause, each other actual bodily harm for no good reason. Minor struggles are another matter. So in our judgment, it is immaterial whether the act occurs in private or in public; it is an assault if actual bodily harm is intended and/or caused. This means that most fights will be unlawful regardless of consent.’

Judges:

Lord Lane CJ

Citations:

[1981] 2 All ER 1057, [1981] 3 WLR 125, [1981] QB 715

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Brown (Anthony); Regina v Lucas; etc HL 11-Mar-1993
The appellants had been convicted of assault, after having engaged in consensual acts of sado-masochism in which they inflicted varying degreees of physical self harm. They had pleaded guilty after a ruling that the prosecution had not needed to . .
Cited – Meachen, Regina v CACD 20-Oct-2006
The appellant appealed his conviction for anal rape. He said the incident had been consensual. He had administered a date rape drug. He said again that this had been consensual. The prosecution alleged that the injuries left were inconsistent with . .
Cited – F v West Berkshire Health Authority HL 17-Jul-1990
The parties considered the propriety of a sterilisation of a woman who was, through mental incapacity, unable to give her consent.
Held: The appeal succeeded, and the operation would be lawful if the doctor considered it to be in the best . .
Cited – Regina v Brown etc CACD 15-Apr-1992
The defendants appealed against their convictions for offences under the 1861 Act of assaults inflicting injury. They said that as sado-masochists, they had mutually consented to the assaults and that no offences had been commited, but pleaded gulty . .
Cited – Gnango, Regina v SC 14-Dec-2011
The prosecutor appealed against a successful appeal by the defendant against his conviction for murder. He and an opponent had engaged in a street battle using guns. His opponent had shot an innocent passer by. The court was now asked as to whether . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.180664

Regina v Bailey: CANI 1956

Lord MacDermott LCJ said that the administration of public justice: ‘comprehends functions that nowadays belong, in practice almost exclusively, to the police, such as the investigation of offences and the arrest of suspected persons.’

Judges:

Lord MacDermott LCJ

Citations:

(1956) NI 15

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Cotter and Others CACD 10-May-2002
The defendants appealed against convictions for conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. They said that the fact that an investigation followed a false allegation was insufficient to found a complaint, and that the extent of the crime was so . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Northern Ireland, Crime

Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.181079

Regina v Griffin: CCA 1869

The court considered when a parent may use the defence of lawful correction of a child as a defence.
Held: Since an infant of 2 and a half years old could not appreciate correction, the father could not justify an assault as correction, and the defence was not available. If the child died as a result, the father would be guilty of manslaughter. A slight slap by a mother is more justifiable than more violent treatment by a father.

Judges:

Martin B

Citations:

(1869) 11 Cox CC 402

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Brown (Anthony); Regina v Lucas; etc HL 11-Mar-1993
The appellants had been convicted of assault, after having engaged in consensual acts of sado-masochism in which they inflicted varying degreees of physical self harm. They had pleaded guilty after a ruling that the prosecution had not needed to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.182254

Regina v K: CACD 11 Dec 2002

While a girl under the age of 16 cannot in law consent to an indecent assault, it is a defence if the defendant honestly believed she was over 16.

Judges:

Lord Justice Rose, Mr Justice Gibbs, Mr Justice Davis

Citations:

[2002] 1 AC 462

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina v K CACD 7-Nov-2000
When the defendant faced a charge of indecent assault on a girl under the age of 16, the prosecution did not face a burden of proving that he had no honest belief that she was 16 or over. The Act intended to produce the effect that no mens rea in . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v G and R HL 16-Oct-2003
The defendants, young boys, had set fire to paper and thrown the lit papers into a wheelie bin, expecting the fire to go out. In fact substantial damage was caused. The House was asked whether a conviction was proper under the section where the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.178453

Regina v Maxwell-King: CACD 2 Jan 2001

The defendant had committed the offence of incitement to commit an unauthorised modification of data by selling equipment to be used to access unauthorised cable channels on TV. The small-scale of his activities, and the high costs order against him, justified a reduction of his sentence from imprisonment to Community service.

Citations:

Times 02-Jan-2001, Gazette 25-Jan-2001

Statutes:

Computer Misuse Act 1990

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Sentencing, Crime

Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.87299

Regina v Canns: CACD 2005

The appellant, while in a secure hospital ward, had killed a male nurse. He was undoubtedly mentally disturbed at the time, suffering chronic paranoid schizophrenia. He was convicted of manslaughter by reason of diminished responsibility. His defence at trial had been self-defence, he believing – genuinely but, as was accepted on appeal, by insane delusion – that the nurse was attacking him in order to rape him. It was submitted on an application for permission to appeal on his behalf – rather as it was submitted to us on this appeal – that it would be ‘unjust and unrealistic’ to deprive such a defendant of a defence ‘based on the reality, to him, of what was going on’. He now sought leave to appeal.
Held: The submission was rejected, and leave refused. Each member of the court ‘has found it impossible to identify the sort of exceptional circumstances in which it would be appropriate to take a psychiatric condition from which a defendant is suffering into account, when addressing the question of whether excessive force is used’.

Judges:

Rose LJ, Vice President, Forbes and Calvert-Smith JJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Crim 2264

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Approved – Martin v Regina CACD 30-Oct-2001
It would not be appropriate except in exceptional circumstances ‘which would make the evidence especially probative’ to take into account, when deciding whether excessive force was used in self-defence, that the defendant was suffering from a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.560629

Director of Public Prosecutions for Northern Ireland v Maxwell: CCA 1978

The defendant was a member of a terrorist organisation, the Ulster Volunteer Force (‘UVF’). Under UVF instructions he took part in what he knew was a planned military mission, by guiding a car containing three or four other men on a cross country journey to a country inn on a winter evening. He knew that they were intending to carry out some form of violent attack on the inn, whether by shooting, bombing or some incendiary device, and he intentionally acted in order to help them to carry out the mission. He did not know the precise form of attack that they were intending to carry out (which was in fact an explosion). He had been charged in the indictment as a principal when he was a secondary, as regards offences of doing an act with intent to cause an explosion and being in possession of a bomb.
Held: The accused was properly convicted of the accessory offence.
It will be sufficient if the offence that was committed was one of a number of offences that the principal party was likely to commit.

Judges:

Lowry LCJ

Citations:

[1978] 1 WLR 1350, [1978] 3 All ER 1140, (1979) 68 Cr App R 128

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Cited by:

Cited – Jogee and Ruddock (Jamaica) v The Queen SC 18-Feb-2016
Joint Enterprise Murder
(and in Privy Council) The two defendants appealed against their convictions (one in Jamaica) for murder, under the law of joint enterprise. Each had been an accessory when their accomplice killed a victim with a knife. The judge in Jogee had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.560301

McGreevy v Director of Public Prosecutions: HL 1973

No Need for Direction on Circumstantial Evidence

M was charged with murdering Margaret Magee in her house. no one claimed to have seen the murder and the evidence was entirely circumstantial. When he was first tried, the jury failed to reach a verdict, but at a subsequent trial he was found guilty and sentenced to life imprisonment. His appeal to the court of criminal appeal was dismissed and he was granted leave to appeal to the House of Lords. The point of Law certified was: ‘whether at a criminal trial with the jury in which the case against the accused depends wholly or substantially on circumstantial evidence, it is the duty of the trial judge not only to tell the jury generally that they must be satisfied of the Guilt of the accused to beyond reasonable doubt, but also to give them a special Direction by telling them in Express terms that before they can find the accused guilty they must be satisfied not only that the circumstances are consistent with this having committed the crime but also that the facts proved are such as to be inconsistent with any other reasonable conclusion.’
Held: There is no requirement, in cases in which the prosecution’s case is based on circumstantial evidence that the judge direct the jury to acquit unless they are sure of the facts proved are not only consistent with guilt but also inconsistent with any other reasonable conclusion. The question for the jury is whether the facts as they find them to be drive them to the conclusion, so that they are sure, that the defendant is guilty.
There is no rule of law that requires the trial judge to give an explanation as to the difference between proof by direct evidence and proof by circumstances leading to a compelling inference of guilt, or any requirement to use any particular form of words. It depends upon the nature of the case and the evidence.
Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest said: ‘The particular form and style of a summing up, provided it contains what must on any view be certain essential elements, must depend not only upon the particular features of a particular case, but also upon the view formed by a judge as to the form and style that will be fair and reasonable and helpful. The solemn function of those concerned in a criminal trial is to clear the innocent and to convict the guilty. It is, however, not for the judge but for the jury to decide what evidence is to be accepted and what conclusion should be drawn from it. It is not to be assumed that members of a jury will abandon their reasoning powers and, having decided that they accept as true some particular piece of evidence, will not proceed further to consider whether the effect of that piece of evidence is to point to guilt or is neutral or is to point to innocence. Nor is it to be assumed that in the process of weighing up a great many separate pieces of evidence will forget the fundamental direction, if carefully given to them, that they must not convict unless they are satisfied that guilt has been proved and has been proved beyond all reasonable doubt.’
Lord Morris said: ‘in my view, the basic necessity before guilt of a criminal charge can be pronounced is that the jury are satisfied of guilt beyond all reasonable doubt. so this is a conception that a jury can readily understand and buy clear exposition can readily be made to understand. so also can a jury readily understand that from one piece of evidence which they accept various influences might be drawn. it requires no more than ordinary common sense or a jury to understand that if one suggested inference from an accepted piece of evidence leads to a conclusion of guilt and another suggested inference to a conclusion of innocence a jury could not on that piece of evidence alone be satisfied of guilt beyond all reasonable doubt unless they holy rejected and excluded the latter suggestion.

Judges:

Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest

Citations:

[1973] 1 WLR 276, [1973] 57 Cr App R 424, [1973] 1 All ER 503

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Kelly v Regina CACD 15-May-2015
Appeal against a conviction for murder brought upon one issue, namely whether a failure by the prosecution to make proper disclosure under the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 rendered the trial of the appellant unfair and the verdict . .
Cited – Regina v Fergus CACD 29-Jun-1993
A judge should withdraw a case which was based on poor identification evidence, and the prosecution must be sure to disclose all identification evidence. ‘In a case dependent on visual identification, and particularly where that is the only . .
Cited – Yaryare and Others v Regina CACD 13-Oct-2020
Appeal from convictions of public order offences – challenges to use of identification evidence. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Crime

Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.546834

Riley and Others, Regina v: CACD 1 Nov 2012

Two of the applicants had absconded. One of them Bradley absconded during his first trial, and was convicted in his absence at a re-trial. He sought to persuade the Court that grounds of appeal lodged on his behalf by counsel and solicitors who continued to act for him even after his disappearance were a nullity having been lodged without authority. The Court held that the grounds were lodged ‘within the scope of their implied or deemed instructions in accordance with the decision in R v Charles and Tucker . .’ and then ratified by the applicant on his return to the United Kingdom.

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Crim 2507

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Regina v Charles, Regina v Tucker CACD 20-Feb-2001
Charles had absconded on the day he was convicted of robbery shortly before the summing up. He was arrested over a year later and sentenced. He gave instructions to his solicitors to advance and renew his applications for leave to appeal conviction . .

Cited by:

Cited – Okedare, Regina v CACD 27-Feb-2014
The court heard applications for leave to appeal on behalf of applicants who had either absconded or disappeared.
Held: The court considered whether the lawyers filing the appeals had authority, whether express or implied. ‘we are satisfied . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.539589

Bremme v Dubery: 1964

The defendant was charged with unlawfully travelling on a railway without paying the fare and with intent to avoid payment. He said that having left the train, he was no longer travelling.
Held: A man who has been physically conveyed on a railway does not cease to travel on that railway merely by alighting on the platform.

Judges:

Parker L

Citations:

[1964] 1 WLR 119

Statutes:

Regulation of Railways Act 1889 3, Transport Act 1962

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Transport, Crime

Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.515110

Regina v Abbas Hussain: CACD 2012

Renewed application for leave to appeal.

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Crim 1714

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Kenny v Regina CACD 30-Jan-2013
The appellant had made a loan to a third party defendant in criminal fraud proceedings. At the time he did not know that that third party was subject to a restraint order under the 2002 Act. When he did come to know of the order he was asked to say . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.470688

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 unexpectedly bit her face. Her husband left the scene to summon help from a relative, along with an ambulance. Other individuals appeared on the scene and at the stage when the injured lady was being put into the ambulance the dog bit someone else.
Held: The Court noted that while there may not have been evidence from which the sheriff could have inferred that the dog was dangerously out of control when it bit the first lady by the stage of the subsequent bite ‘there was material upon which the sheriff could have inferred that there were grounds for reasonable apprehension that the dog would injure someone’.

Citations:

1993 GWD 15-975

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

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

Scotland, Animals, Crime

Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.503462

Regina v Barnard: CACD 1980

The defendant appealed against his conviction for conspiracy to steal. He said that the judge had wrongly allowed evidence to go to the jury of a conspiracy to rob of which he was not part.
A jeweller had been robbed by three men armed with an iron bar. They tied him up and made off with his stock. In due course the three robbers either pleaded guilty to or were convicted of the robbery. A count against them of conspiracy to rob was ordered to remain on the file. There was evidence that the appellant had previously reconnoitred the premises with two of the robbers, as he admitted when he was interviewed by the police. His explanation was that he was a professional burglar specialising in jewellers’ shops, but that his method involved gaining entry through the premises above the shop. He said that he abandoned any idea of stealing from the shop after surveying the way in which the jeweller conducted his business, and that at no time had he ever discussed robbing the jeweller in his shop.
Held: A conspiracy to commit theft could only be committed if the course of conduct to be pursued would necessarily involve the commission of the theft in accordance with the intention of the conspirators. Since a conspiracy to steal was not a lesser form of a conspiracy to rob but a different agreement, the evidence of the conspiracy to rob offered here, had no relevance to a conspiracy to commit theft. The appellant’s case had been undermined by the trial judge allowing the evidence of the robbery to go before a jury and thus enable them to infer that the scheme had not been abandoned, whereas he should have directed them to ignore that evidence, the jury had been misdirected and the appeal would be allowed and the conviction quashed.
Lawton LJ said: ‘It also follows that the evidence of the overt acts pursuant to the conspiracy to rob had no relevance to the conspiracy to steal, because they showed an intention by those who carried out the agreement to rob to do something other than follow the intentions of those who had started by agreeing to steal.’

Judges:

Lawton LJ

Citations:

[1980] 70 Cr App R 28

Statutes:

Criminal Law Act 1967 6(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Mehta v Regina CACD 31-Dec-2012
The defendant appealed against his conviction for conspiracy to defraud. His co-defendant and alleged co-conspirator had been acquitted.
Held: The appeal against conviction failed. The defence knew that they were going to have to deal with the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.467723

Regina v Machin: 1980

Eveleigh LJ discussed the elements making up the offence of perverting the course of justice: ‘The particular acts or conduct in question may take many different forms including conduct that amounts in itself to some other criminal offence.’

Judges:

Eveleigh LJ

Citations:

[1980] 71 Cr App R 166

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.470687

12 Jac 2 Cr 647 Hob 89, Foxcroft And Lacy’s Case: 1220

Slander, Description, Nosme, Joinder in Action.
A bill was preferred in the Star-chamber against sixteen, the plaiiitiff was one of them ; and B. said that John Farrer was murdered by William Oldfield ; and having discourse concerning the said bill, said also, that the said sixteen defendants to the said bill abetted the said murder ; for these words, the plaintiff being one of the sixteen brought his action ; the defendant pleads not guilty ; and ’tis found for the plaintiff; he has judgment affirmed in error ; for the description of a person is a slander to him, although he be not named ; and is sufficient to maintainan action ; and the plaintiff alone my bring this action ; and every one of the sixteen may have the like action against the defendant.

Citations:

[1220] EngR 112, (1220-1623) Jenk 297, (1220) 145 ER 216 (E)

Links:

Commonlii

Crime

Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.461024

Cafferata v Wilson: KBD 1936

The defendant appealed by case stated against a decision that a dummy revolver which was not capable of firing a bullet or other missile was a firearm within the meaning of section12(1) of the 1920 Act or, alternatively, all the parts of the dummy other than the solid barrel were parts of a firearm. The dummy shared the characteristics of the starting pistol in the instant appeal in that there was a vent hole for the escape of gas but, in contrast, no hole had been drilled such as to permit the discharge of a missile.
Held: The appeal failed. A dummy pistol capable of adaptation, in this case by boring the barrel, is either a firearm or is part of a firearm within the meaning of the section.
Lord Hewart CJ said: ‘Everything turns on the definition of ‘firearm’ in the Act of 1920. At the material time the article was incapable of being fired, but a part of it needed alteration to make it suitable for firing. The magistrate has held that the article as a whole is part of a firearm within the meaning of the definition. That is quite a tenable proposition. If something had had to be added to the dummy to make it into a complete revolver, the dummy might be said to be part of a revolver. It seems to make no difference that the decisive part was not to be in addition, but an adaptation of what was already there. It is easier to support the decision from another point of view. The dummy contains everything else necessary for making a revolver except the barrel, and therefore all the other parts of it except those which require to be bored are ‘parts thereof’ within the meaning of the section. The magistrate has not misdirected himself and the appeal must be dismissed.’

Judges:

Lord Hewart CJ

Citations:

[1936] 3 All ER 149

Statutes:

Firearms Act 1920 12(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Bewley v Regina CACD 6-Jul-2012
The defendant appealed against his conviction for possession of a firearm. The crown had been able to make it discharge a pellet only by taking elaborate preparatory steps. ‘There being no dispute but that the starting pistol was a lethal-barrelled . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.462424