Regina v G (Secretary of State for the Home Department intervening): HL 18 Jun 2008

The defendant was fifteen. He was convicted of statutory rape of a 13 year old girl, believing her to be 15. He appealed saying that as an offence of strict liability he had been denied a right to a fair trial, and also that the offence charged was excessive, violating his right to privacy.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. Applying Gemell, the defendant’s human rights were not engaged by substantive criminal law. The cases of Laskey and KA and AD v Belgium showed that a state could properly involve itself in such matters. Lord Hope and Lord Carswell dissenting – it was unlawful to continue to prosecute for rape when the prosecutor adopted the defence version of events that the complainant had consented.
Lord Hoffmann said: ‘The mental element of the offence under section 5, as the language and structure of the section makes clear, is that penetration must be intentional but there is no requirement that the accused must have known that the other person was under 13. The policy of the legislation is to protect children. If you have sex with someone who is on any view a child or young person, you take your chance on exactly how old they are. To that extent the offence is one of strict liability and it is no defence that the accused believed the other person to be 13 or over.’
Article 8 confers a qualified right protecting a person’s private or family life, but if the state is justified in treating the person’s conduct as unlawful that is the end of the matter.
Lady Hale thought that article 8 did not apply, because a rule which prevented a child under 13 from giving legally recognised consent to sexual activity and a statute which treated penile penetration as a most serious form of such activity did not amount to a lack of respect for the private life of the penetrating male. If, however, article 8 applied, Lady Hale considered that the interference was justified and proportionate in the pursuit of the legitimate aims of the protection of health and morals and of the rights and freedoms of others.

Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hope of Craighead, Baroness Hale of Richmond, Lord Carswell, Lord Mance
[2008] UKHL 37, Times 20-Jun-2008, [2008] 1 WLR 1379, [2009] 1 AC 92, [2009] 1 Cr App R 8, [2008] HRLR 36, [2009] UKHRR 72, [2008] 3 All ER 1071, [2008] Crim LR 818, [2009] AC 92
Bailii, HL
Sexual Offences Act 2003 5, European Convention on Human Rights 6
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Z And Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 10-May-2001
Four children complained that, for years before they were taken into care by the local authority, its social services department was well aware that they were living in filthy conditions and suffering ‘appalling’ neglect in the home of their . .
Cited – Matthews v Ministry of Defence HL 13-Feb-2003
The claimant sought damages against the Crown, having suffered asbestosis whilst in the armed forces. He challenged the denial to him of a right of action by the 1947 Act.
Held: Human rights law did not create civil rights, but rather voided . .
Cited – Salabiaku v France ECHR 7-Oct-1988
A Zairese national living in Paris, went to the airport to collect, as he said, a parcel of foodstuffs sent from Africa. He could not find this, but was shown a locked trunk, which he was advised to leave alone. He however took possession of it, . .
Applied – Regina v Gemmell CACD 17-Jul-2002
Dyson LJ said: ‘The position is quite clear. So far as Article 6 is concerned, the fairness of the provisions of the substantive law of the Contracting States is not a matter for investigation. The content and interpretation of domestic substantive . .
Cited – Laskey, Jaggard and Brown v The United Kingdom ECHR 19-Feb-1997
A prosecution for sado-masochist acts was a necessary invasion of privacy to protect health. The Court found no violation where applicants were imprisoned as a result of sado-masochistic activities captured on video tape when police obtained . .
Cited – KA And AD v Belgium ECHR 17-Feb-2005
ECHR Judgment (Merits) – No violation of Art. 6-1; No violation of Art. 7; No violation of Art. 8.
The defendants complained that their conviction for assaults committed in the course of sado-masochistic . .
Cited – Regina v Corran, Regina v Cutler, Regina v Heard, Regina v Willams CACD 2-Feb-2005
Various sentences were appealed in respect of defendants convicted of sexual offences under the 2003 Act.
Held: The Act contained new extended ranges of sexual offences, and these required resvised sentencing guidelines. The starting point for . .
Cited – Dudgeon v The United Kingdom ECHR 22-Oct-1981
ECHR (Plenary Court) Legislation in Northern Ireland that criminalised homosexual behaviour which was lawful in the rest of the UK.
Held: There was a violation of article 8, but it was not necessary to . .
Cited – Regina v Hess; Regina v Nguyen 1990
The protection of children from the evils of intercourse is multi-faceted and so obvious as not to require formal demonstration. . .
Cited – S v the Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 28-Jun-2006
A 15 year old defendant was accused of sexual intercourse with a 12 year old complainant, the prosecutor abandoned the charge under section 5 and substituted one under section 13 as it appeared that the conduct in question was consensual. . .
Cited – G and R v Secretary of State for the Home Department CACD 12-Apr-2006
The defendants appealed their convictions for rape of a girl under 13.
Held: The appeals were dismissed, but the sentences were reduced to conditional discharges. . .
Cited – Kehoe, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions HL 14-Jul-2005
The applicant contended that the 1991 Act infringed her human rights in denying her access to court to obtain maintenance for her children.
Held: The applicant had no substantive right to take part in the enforcement process in domestic law . .
Cited – Barnfather v London Borough of Islington Education Authority, Secretary of State for Education and Skills QBD 7-Mar-2003
The appellant was convicted of the crime of being a parent whose child had failed to attend school regularly. She challenged saying that the offence required no guilty act on her part, but was one of strict liability, and contrary to her human . .
Cited – Regina v Daniel CACD 22-Mar-2002
The defendant appealed a conviction for hiding assets from her receiver following her bankruptcy. He said that recent case law suggested that the burden of establishing the defence under section 352 was evidential only.
Held: The conviction . .
Cited – Hansen v Denmark ECHR 11-Jul-2000
Hudoc Judgment (Struck out of the list) Struck out of the list (friendly settlement) . .

Cited by:
Cited – E and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 10-Jun-2011
Judicial review was sought of a decision by the respondent to prosecute a child for her alleged sexual abuse of her younger sisters. Agencies other than the police and CPS considered that a prosecution would harm both the applicant and her sisters. . .
Cited – Brown, Regina v (Northern Ireland) SC 26-Jun-2013
The complainaint, a 13 year old girl had first said that the defendant had had intercourse with her againt her consent. After his arrest, she accepted that this was untrue. On being recharged with unlawful intercourse, he admitted guilt believing he . .
Cited – AB v Her Majesty’s Advocate SC 5-Apr-2017
This appeal is concerned with a challenge to the legality of legislation of the Scottish Parliament which deprives a person, A, who is accused of sexual activity with an under-aged person, B, of the defence that he or she reasonably believed that B . .
At HL – G v The United Kingdom ECHR 30-Aug-2011
The appellant aged 15, had sexual intercourse with a girl aged 12. He pleaded guilty to a charge of rape of a child under 13, contrary to section 5 of the 2003 Act, on the written basis that the intercourse was consensual in fact (although by reason . .
Cited – SXH v The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) SC 11-Apr-2017
The Court was asked: ‘Does a decision by a public prosecutor to bring criminal proceedings against a person fall potentially within the scope of article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights in circumstances where a) the prosecutor has . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Human Rights

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.269989

Mason v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 15 Jul 2009

The defendant appealed against his conviction for attempting to drive after consuming excess alcohol. On reporting to the police that as he opened the door of his car, he had been threatened with a knife, and his car taken, it was suspected he had consumed alcohol, and he was arrested.
Held: The conviction was quashed. His acts fell short of attempting to drive the vehicle, being merely preparatory: ‘what the appellant did was no more than an act preparatory . . the appellant certainly had the necessary mens rea . . the appellant admitted his intention to drive the car, but mens rea absent sufficient actus reus is not enough to constitute guilt.’

Irwin, Nicol JJ
[2009] EWHC 2198 (Admin), [2010] RTR 11
Bailii
Road Traffic Act 1988 5(1)(a), Criminal Attempts Act 1981 3
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Campbell (Tony) CACD 1991
The defendant appealed his conviction for attempting to rob a sub post office. He had been seen earlier by police lurking in the vicinity wearing a crash helmet and sunglasses. He returned after a short time, without the sunglasses but carrying an . .
Cited – Regina v Gulliver (orse Gullefer / Gullerfer) CACD 1990
The defendant appealed against his conviction of the attempted theft of his stake from a bookmaker at a greyhound racetrack. The dog which the appellant had backed was not doing well. During the race the appellant climbed on to a fence in front of . .
Cited – Regina v Qadir, Khan CACD 25-Jul-1997
The defendants appealed against their convictions for the attempted exportation of heroin. The defendants said that they had acted as part of a US law enforcement action.
Held: The appeal failed: ‘section 170(2) creates a self-contained . .

Cited by:
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Moore Admn 2-Mar-2010
The defendant appealed by case stated from his conviction of attempting to drive a motor vehicle on a public road, having consumed alcohol in excess of the prescribed limit on the same occasion. At the time he was said to have attempted to drive, . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.374381

Regina v S and A: CACD 9 Oct 2008

The defendant appealed against his conviction under the 2000 Act for failing to disclose the key used to encrypt a computer file. He was subject to a control order as a suspected terrorist. As the police raided his house, they found the key had been half entered. He said that the requirement to disclose the key would infringe his right not to incriminate himself.
Held: The appeal failed.
Sir Igor Judge P said: ‘the key which provides access to protected data, like the data itself, exists separately from each appellant’s ‘will’. Even if it is true that each created his own key, once created, the key to the data, remains independent of the appellant’s ‘will’ . . the key to the computer equipment is no different to the key to a locked drawer. The contents of the drawer exist independently of the suspect: so does the key to it. The contents may or may not be incriminating: the key is neutral. In the present cases the prosecution is in possession of the drawer: it cannot however gain access to the contents. ‘ and
‘The key or password is, as we have explained, a fact. It does not constitute an admission of guilt. Only knowledge of it may be incriminating. The purpose of the statute is to regulate the use of encrypted material, and to impose limitations on the circumstances in which it may be used. The requirement for information is based on the interests of national security and the prevention and detection of crime, and is expressly subject to a proportionality test and judicial oversight. In the end the requirement to disclose extends no further than the provision of the key or password or access to the information. No further questions arise. ‘

Sir Igor Judge P, Penry-Davey, Simon JJ
[2008] EWCA Crim 2177, [2009] 1 All ER 716
Bailii
Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 53, European Convention of Human Rights
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Blunt v Park Lane Hotel Ltd CA 1942
The court considered the rule against self incrimination. Lord Justice Goddard said: ‘The rule is that no one is bound to answer any questions if the answer thereto would, in the opinion of the judge, have a tendency to expose the defendant to any . .
Cited – Saunders v The United Kingdom ECHR 17-Dec-1996
(Grand Chamber) The subsequent use against a defendant in a prosecution, of evidence which had been obtained under compulsion in company insolvency procedures was a convention breach of Art 6. Although not specifically mentioned in Article 6 of the . .
Cited – Regina v Director of Serious Fraud Office, ex Parte Smith HL 15-Jul-1992
The applicant having been cautioned for an offence under the Companies Act 1985, he objected to being required to answer questions put to him in connection with the matter by the Director of the Serious Fraud Office under the 1987 Act.
Held: . .
Cited – Attorney-General’s Reference (No 7 of 2000) CACD 29-Mar-2001
The defendant had been convicted of offences under the Insolvency Act. Evidence of his gambling was found in cheque stubs, bank statements, returned cheques and a betting file containing loose gambling statements by way of computer print outs . .
Cited – Stott (Procurator Fiscal, Dunfermline) and Another v Brown PC 5-Dec-2000
The system under which the registered keeper of a vehicle was obliged to identify herself as the driver, and such admission was to be used subsequently as evidence against her on a charge of driving with excess alcohol, was not a breach of her right . .
Cited – Regina v Kearns CACD 22-Mar-2002
The defendant had failed to account for the disappearance of a substantial part of his estate to the official receiver following his bankruptcy. He appealed his conviction for failing to provide an account, saying that the requirement to provide . .
Cited – Hundal and Dhaliwal, Regina v CACD 3-Feb-2004
The defendants appealed against conviction and sentence for membership of an organisation proscribed under the 2000 Act. The defendants said that at the time they joined the organisation was not proscribed, and had left before it became proscribed. . .
Cited – C Plc and W v P and Secretary of State for the Home Office and the Attorney General ChD 26-May-2006
cplc_pChD2006
The claimant sought damages from the first defendant for breach of copyright. An ex parte search order had been executed, with the defendant asserting his privilege against self-incrimination. As computer disks were examined, potentially unlawful . .
Cited – Malik v Manchester Crown Court and others; Re A Admn 19-Jun-2008
The claimant was a journalist writing about terrorism. He had interviewed a man with past connections with Al-Qaeda, and he now objected to a production order for documents obtained by him in connecion with his writings. The court had acted on . .
Cited – Jalloh v Germany ECHR 11-Jul-2006
The applicant, after arrest, had been forced to regurgitate a bag of cocaine, there was a complaint that article 3 had been violated as well as article 6.
Held: Even evidence which may properly be described as ‘independent of the will of the . .

Cited by:
Cited – Greater Manchester Police v Andrews Admn 23-May-2011
The CC appealed by case stated against a refusal of an order under the 2000 Act for the disclosure by the defendant of a cryptography key. The defendant had a history of sexual offences against children and had failed to keep to the terms of a . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Human Rights

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.276957

Rice v Connolly: 1966

No Legal Duty to Assist a Constable

At common law there is no legal duty to provide the police with information or otherwise to assist them with their inquiries. Lord Parker set out three questions to be answered when asking whether there had been an obstruction of an officer in the execution of his duties: (1) Was there any obstruction of a constable? (2) Was the Constable acting lawfully in the execution of his duty? And (3) Was the obstruction intended to obstruct the constable in the execution of his duty?
Lord Parker CJ said: ‘It is also in my judgment clear that it is part of the obligations and duties of a police constable to take all steps which appear to him necessary for keeping the peace, for preventing crime or for protecting property from criminal injury. There is no exhaustive definition of the powers and obligations of the police, but they are at least those, and they would further include the duty to detect crime and to bring an offender to justice . . it seems to me quite clear that the defendant was making it more difficult for the police to carry out their duties, and that the police at the time and throughout were acting in accordance with their duties. The only remaining ingredient, and the one upon which in my judgment this case revolves, is whether the obstructing of which the defendant was guilty was a wilful obstruction. ‘Wilful’ in this context not only in my judgment means ‘intentional’ but something which is done without lawful excuse, and that is indeed conceded . . Accordingly, the sole question here is whether the defendant had a lawful excuse for refusing to answer the questions put to him. In my judgment he had. It seems to me quite clear that although every citizen has a moral duty or, if you like, a social duty to assist the police, there is no legal duty to that effect, and indeed the whole basis of the common law is the right of the individual to refuse to answer questions put to him by persons in authority, and to refuse to accompany those in authority to any particular place; short, of course, of arrest.’
. . and ‘In my judgment there is all the difference in the world between deliberately telling a false story someth ing which on no view a citizen has a right to do – and preserving silence or refusing to answer, something which he has every right to do. Accordingly, in my judgment, looked at in that perfectly general way, it was not shown that the refusal of the defendant to answer the questions or to accompany the police officer in the first instance to the police box was an obstruction without lawful excuse. ‘

Lord Parker CJ
[1966] 2 QB 414, [1966] 3 WLR 17
Police Act 1964 51(3)
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Hinchcliffe v Sheldon QBD 20-Jan-1955
The appellant was the son of the licensee of an inn. On returning to the inn one night at about 11.17, he found that police officers wished to enter the premises as they suspected that the licensee was committing an offence under the Licensing Act . .

Cited by:
Cited – Ashworth Security Hospital v MGN Limited HL 27-Jun-2002
Order for Journalist to Disclose Sources
The newspaper published details of the medical records of Ian Brady, a prisoner and patient of the applicant. The applicant sought an order requiring the defendant newspaper to disclose the identity of the source of material which appeared to have . .
Cited – Green v Moore 1982
The respondent, a probationer police constable was convicted for obstructing police officers in the execution of their duty under s51(3) of the 1964 Act. He was a regular in a bar he knew was to be raided. He warned the landlord who complied with . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions, Regina (on the Application of) v Glendinning Admn 13-Oct-2005
The defendant had been accused of obstructing a constable in the execution of his duty by warning motorists of presence of a police speed trap. The prosecutor appealed from dismissal of the charge.
Held: ‘the hand signals given by the . .
Cited – Dibble v Ingleton 1972
A motorist was suspected of driving under the influence of alcohol and was required to provide a specimen of breath. He claimed that he had consumed alcohol only a few minutes earlier and the constable had to wait until 20 minutes had elapsed before . .
Cited – Wood v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis CA 21-May-2009
The appellant had been ostentatiously photographed by the police as he left a company general meeting. He was a peaceful and lawful objector to the Arms Trade. He appealed against refusal of an order for the records to be destroyed. The police had . .
Cited – Lunt v Director of Public Prosecutions QBD 1993
The defendant had been in a road traffic accident. The police came to his house to investigate the accident, but he refused to unlock the door to allow them entry. Stating reliance on section 4 of the 1988 Act, the officers threatened to force . .
Cited – McCann v Crown Prosecution Service Admn 21-Aug-2015
Appeal by case stated against conviction for obstructing a police officer in the execution of his duty. The appellant had been protesting. She, correctly, thought the land to be a rivate highway. The police officer had thought it a public hghway and . .
Cited – Michael and Others v The Chief Constable of South Wales Police and Another SC 28-Jan-2015
The claimants asserted negligence in the defendant in failing to provide an adequate response to an emergency call, leading, they said to the death of their daughter at the hands of her violent partner. They claimed also under the 1998 Act. The . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Crime

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.231648

HM Solicitor General v Cox and Another: QBD 27 May 2016

Applications for committal of the defendants for having taken photographs of court proceedings when their friend was being sentenced for murder and publishing them on Facebook. The SG urged that the offences had aggravating features taking the matter beyond the offence under section 41 of the 1925 Act.
Held: The appeal failed. The offence had been committed. Section 41 of the 1925 Act did not remove the possibility of a charge of contenpt of court for taking photographs in court.
Whilst it was pssible that a person taking photographs might not have the necessary mens rea for the offence: ‘A person cannot defend himself by evidence that, ignorant of the criminal law and unaware of the prohibition on photography, he could not intend to interfere with the administration of justice. If there were no signs prohibiting the taking of photographs in the part of the building where the act takes place or prohibiting the use of mobile phones in court, and there may be none say in canteens, the court could not be left powerless to deal with the risk created to the administration of justice as a result of ignorance of the criminal law on the part of the person whose acts create or risk creating the interference. The same applies to publication of illegally taken photographs in the Facebook postings.
Where the act which constitutes a contempt in the face of the court, or one closely akin to such a contempt, is not a crime, the deliberate breach of a court order of which he has notice will be sufficient. It is not necessary that the person additionally intended by his breach to interfere with the administration of justice, though for the reasons we have set out and which were considered in Dallas, it will generally readily be inferred that such an intention is established. It does not matter in principle whether the order is specific, as in a judge’s direction to a jury on internet searches, or general, as in the public notices in court buildings. The latter are there, either reflecting the criminal law, or, where not, expressing what every judge requires and relies on to let the public and participants know what is required for the administration of justice. Where a person knows of the court order and deliberately breaches it, he knows that the prohibition which he breaches was put in place to prevent interference with the course of justice. Therefore, the questions whether the breach was knowing and deliberate and whether it was intended to interfere with the course of justice amount to the same question, even if the person may not have realised or understood quite how the administration of justice could be interfered with. He would know that it would be put at risk.’

Thomas LCJ L, Ouseley J
[2016] EWHC 1241 (QB), [2016] EMLR 22, [2016] 2 Cr App R 15
Bailii
Criminal Justice Act 1925 41
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Attorney-General v Leveller Magazine Ltd HL 1-Feb-1979
The appellants were magazines and journalists who published, after committal proceedings, the name of a witness, a member of the security services, who had been referred to as Colonel B during the hearing. An order had been made for his name not to . .
Cited – Attorney-General v Newspaper Publishing plc CA 1987
The court explained the common law basis of the law of contempt of court. Lloyd LJ said: ‘Since the test of contempt is not a breach of the order but interference with the administration of justice, it follows that at common law a contempt may be . .
Cited – Attorney-General v Sport Newspapers Ltd QBD 24-May-1991
The newspaper was accused of disclosing details of the previous convictions of an absconded suspect in a murder investigation, despite a prior warning from the police that any such publication would be likely to prejudice future criminal . .
Cited – Schot and Another, v Regina CACD 12-May-1997
Jurors, after retirement refused to deliver a verdict claiming personal reasons. The were summoned to court to answer charges of contempt of court. Explaining the contempt proceedings that the jurors faced, the trial judge said: ‘[I]n so far as . .
Cited – Regina v Vincent D (Contempt of Court: Illegal Photography) CACD 2004
The appellant was the brother of the defendant in a major drugs trial, which involved a protected witness. He took a photograph in the canteen area, and another from the public gallery facing towards the witness box, witness and bench. The quality . .
Cited – Robertson and Another v Her Majesty’s Advocate HCJ 7-Nov-2007
Gough, ‘the naked rambler’, argued that his desire to appear naked in court, an act which he characterised as a fundamental freedom, was not an act calculated to offend the authority and dignity of the court; in order for his naked appearance to . .
Cited – Attorney General v Dallas Admn 23-Jan-2012
The A-G, using RSC Order 52, sought a finding that the defendant was in contempt when, as a juror she had conducted internet research about the case, revealing her results to other jury members.
Held: She was in contempt. She had deliberately . .
Cited – HM Attorney General v Davey Admn 29-Jul-2013
The Attorney general sought the committal of the defendants for contempt of court alleging their misbehaviour as jurors. One had posted to a facebook account about the trial and lied about it to the judge. The second, in a different trial, had . .
Cited – HM Attorney General v Davey Admn 29-Jul-2013
The Attorney general sought the committal of the defendants for contempt of court alleging their misbehaviour as jurors. One had posted to a facebook account about the trial and lied about it to the judge. The second, in a different trial, had . .
Cited – Morris v Crown Office CA 1970
The applicants had been engaged in a calculated and coordinated campaign of disruption of the court.
Held: ‘The archaic description of these proceedings as ‘contempt of court’ is in my view unfortunate and misleading. It suggests that they are . .
Cited – Dallas v The United Kingdom ECHR 11-Feb-2016
Test for contempt was accessible and foreseeable.
The applicant had been convicted of contempt of court in that whilst acting as a juror, and in defiance of an explicit direction from the judge had researched the defendant in the internet, and passed on her findings to other jurors.
Held: the . .

Cited by:
Cited – HM Attorney General v Yaxley-Lennon QBD 9-Jul-2019
Application by Her Majesty’s Attorney General for an order committing the respondent to prison for contempt of court. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court, Crime, Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.564987

Athwal and Others, Regina v: CACD 7 May 2009

The appellants challenged their conviction for murder and sentences. The victim was the young second wife of the first defendant. It was said that she had been unfaithful, and having been lured to India, had been murdered there. She had disappeared, but no body had been found. Relatives then came forward to give evidence of a conspiracy to murder. A claim was made that the prosecution for murder was an abuse of process, because there had been an inequality of arms, with legal aid being refused for substantive investigations in India, though the prosecution had made such investigations.
Held: There had been no abuse of process. The substantial disputes related to events in England. Complaint had been made as to the use made of previous inconsistent statements. The court now found that the judge had failed properly to apply the 2003 Act, which should now be used to provide a comprehensive code on the use of hearsay evidence. However this did not affect the safety of the convictions.

Lord Justice Maurice Kay, Mr Justice Mackay and Mr Justice Stadlen
[2009] EWCA Crim 789, Times 14-Jul-2009, [2009] 2 Cr App Rep 14, [2009] Crim LR 726, [2009] 1 WLR 2430
Bailii
Criminal Justice Act 2003 114(1)(d)
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Momodou and Limani CACD 2-Feb-2005
The defendants appealed against their convictions and sentence for violent disorder and assault during an uprising at Yarl’s Wood Detention centre. It was said that witnesses had been coached, other defence witnesses had been returned to their . .
Cited – Nominal Defendant v Clements 1961
(Australia) Dixon CJ said of the rules regarding the significance of previous inconsistent statements: ‘in as much as the rule forms a definite exception to the general principle excluding statements made out of court and admits a possibly . .
Cited – Regina v Oyesiku CACD 1971
The court considered the admissibility of evidence of consistent statements in order to rebut an allegation of recent fabrication. There may be a residual discretion with the judge to permit re-examination to show consistency when there is . .
Cited – Subramaniam v Director of Public Prosecutions PC 1956
(Malaysia) The defendant sought to advance a defence of duress under a section of the Penal Code of the Federated Malay States which provided that, with certain exceptions, ‘nothing is an offence which is done by a person who is compelled to do it . .
Cited – T, Regina v CACD 13-Feb-2008
Section 120 does not go as to admissibility
David Clarke J explained the effect of the section: ‘section 120(2) is not itself a provision governing admissibility . . what the sub-section does is to regulate the use to which such evidence, once admitted, may be put. It is then admissible as . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Criminal Evidence

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.341837

Medvedyev And Others v France: ECHR 29 Mar 2010

(Grand Chamber) A Cambodian vessel, The Winner, trafficked drugs on the high seas (Cape Verde). It was detected and boarded by the French authorities, detaining the crew on board and took them on the vessel to France for trial. France was, but Cambodia was not, party to the relevant international drug trafficking conventions, which did not in the circumstances authorise the arrest by France of the Cambodian vessel. Nevertheless, Cambodia had given France specific ad hoc authorisation ‘to intercept, inspect and take legal action against the ship’. The crew complained that they were not within the jurisdiction of the French Courts.
Held: (Majority) They were within the jurisdiction of France for the purposes of article 1, France ‘having exercised full and exclusive control over the Winner and its crew, at least de facto, from the time of its interception, in a continuous and uninterrupted manner until they were tried in France (contrast Bankovic, cited above)’. As to Bankovic, the Court noted that it was ‘only in exceptional cases that acts of the Contracting States performed, or producing effects, outside their territories can constitute an exercise of jurisdiction by them for the purposes of article 1 . . this excluded situations, however, where – as in the Bankovic case – what was at issue was an instantaneous extraterritorial act, as the provisions of article 1 did not admit of a ’cause-and-effect’ notion of ‘jurisdiction’.’
The detention of the crew was nevertheless unjustified. Although international as well as domestic law was capable of shaping a ‘procedure prescribed by law’ within article 5.1, Cambodia’s ad hoc authorisation did not meet the requirements under article 5.1 of ‘clearly defined’ and ‘foreseeable’ law. The Court allowed the possibility of a purely factual (albeit unlawfully exercised) concept of jurisdiction under article 1. Dissenting, seven judges, said that article 1 applied: ‘the Winner – with the agreement of the flag state – was undeniably within the jurisdiction of France for the purposes of article 1.’. That state B may authorise state A to exercise jurisdiction which would otherwise belong to state B for the purposes of article 1 was consistent with the principles in Bankovic.
The court awarded 5,000 Euros in damages.

(2010) 51 EHRR 39, 3394/03, [2010] ECHR 384
Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights 1 5.1
Human Rights
Citing:
Explained – Bankovic v Belgium ECHR 12-Dec-2001
(Grand Chamber) Air strikes were carried out by NATO forces against radio and television facilities in Belgrade on 23 April 1999. The claims of five of the applicants arose out of the deaths of relatives in this raid. The sixth claimed on his own . .

Cited by:
Cited – Smith, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Defence and Oxfordshire Assistant Deputy Coroner (Equality and Human Rights Commission intervening) SC 30-Jun-2010
The deceased soldier died of heat exhaustion whilst on active service in Iraq. It was said that he was owed a duty under human rights laws, and that any coroner’s inquest should be a fuller one to satisfy the state’s duty under Article 2.
Cited – Lumba (WL) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 23-Mar-2011
The claimants had been detained under the 1971 Act, after completing sentences of imprisonment pending their return to their home countries under deportations recommended by the judges at trial, or chosen by the respondent. They challenged as . .
Cited – Assange v The Swedish Prosecution Authority SC 30-May-2012
The defendant sought to resist his extradition under a European Arrest Warrant to Sweden to face charges of sexual assaults. He said that the prosecutor who sought the extradition was not a judicial authority within the Framework Decision.
Cited – Faulkner, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and Another SC 1-May-2013
The applicants had each been given a life sentence, but having served the minimum term had been due to have the continued detention reviewed to establish whether or not continued detention was necessary for the protection of the pblic. It had not . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, International, Crime, Transport

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.406700

Regina v Whitehouse: CACD 18 Feb 1977

The defendant had plea of guilty to two charges of inciting his daughter, aged 15, to commit incest with him. He appealed saying that it was possible that the offences of which he had been convicted were unknown to the law. The prosecution conceded that the common law offence of incitement consisted of inciting another to commit a crime and that a girl aged 15 was incapable of committing the crime of incest by statute. The prosecution argued that the indictment could be read to charge the defendant with inciting his daughter to aid and abet him to have unlawful sexual intercourse with her, contrary to another statutory provision.
Held: The appeal succeeded. As the daughter was incapable of committing the crime of incest, the defendant could not be guilty of the common law offence of incitement. Further, given the statutory context, the daughter could not in law have aided and abetted her father to commit incest with her. It followed that there was no offence known to the law of a man inciting a girl under the age of 16 to aid and abet him to have unlawful sexual intercourse with her.

Scarman, Geoffrey Lane LJJ, Donaldson J
[1977] EWCA Crim 2, [1977] 3 All ER 737, 142 JP 45, [1977] 2 WLR 925, (1977) 65 Cr App Rep 33, [1977] QB 868
Bailii
England and Wales

Crime

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.249938

Essex Trading Standards v Singh: Admn 3 Mar 2009

The defendant had been accused of selling counterfeit trainer shoes. The prosecutor appealed against dismissal of the prosecution on the basis that the defenant had not known that they were counterfeit.
Held: The onus of proof lay on the defendant to establish on objectively reasonable grounds that these were genuine goods. No reasonable bench could have concluded that he had such positive reason, and therefore the prosecutor’s appeal succeeded.

Goldring LJ, Sweeney J
[2009] EWHC 520 (Admin)
Bailii
Trade Marks Act 1994 92(1)(c)
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Johnstone HL 22-May-2003
The defendant was convicted under the 1994 Act of producing counterfeit CDs. He argued that the affixing of the name of the artist to the CD was not a trade mark use, and that the prosecution had first to establish a civil offence before his act . .
Cited – Regina v S (Trade Mark Defence) (Roger Sliney v London Borough of Havering) CACD 20-Nov-2002
The defendant alleged that the offence of which had been convicted, under the 1994 Act, infringed his rights under article 6.2 in reversing the burden of proof.
Held: The principle that the duty of proof lay on the prosecution was subject to . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Intellectual Property

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.323735

Regina v Dica: CACD 5 May 2004

Reckless HIV transmission – Grievous Bodily Harm

The defendant appealed against his conviction for inflicting grievous bodily harm. He had HIV/Aids, and was found to have transmitted the disease by intercourse when the victims were not informed of his condition. It was not suggested that any rape had occurred or that he had intended to inflict the disease.
Held: The court was content to ‘remove some of the outdated restrictions against the successful prosecution of those who, knowing that they are suffering HIV or some other serious sexual disease, recklessly transmit it through consensual sexual intercourse, and inflict grievous bodily harm on a person from whom the risk is concealed and who is not consenting to it.’ A person who is suffering from a sexual disease and who has sexual intercourse with a partner, not intending deliberately to infect her, but knowing that she was unaware of his condition, may be guilty of recklessly inflicting grievous bodily harm.
However, the judge had not properly directed the jury as to whether the complainants knew of his condition, and the trial judge should not have withdrawn the issue of consent from the jury. Retrial ordered.

Mr Justice Forbes Lord Justice Judge Lord Chief Justice Of England And Wales
[2004] EWCA Crim 1103, Times 11-May-2004, [2004] QB 1257, [2002] 2 Cr App R 28
Bailii
Offences Against the Person Act 1861 20
England and Wales
Citing:
Overruled – Regina v Clarence CCCR 20-Nov-1888
The defendant knew that he had gonorrhea. He had intercourse with his wife, and infected her. She would not have consented had she known. He appealed his convictions for assault and causing grievous bodily harm.
Held: ‘The question in this . .
Cited – Regina v R HL 23-Oct-1991
H has no right to sexual intercourse with W – rape
The defendant appealed against his conviction for having raped his wife, saying that intercourse with his wife was necessarily lawful, and therefore outside the statutory definition of rape. Due to the matrimonial difficulties, the wife had left . .
Cited – Regina v Taylor 1869
It was ‘contrary to common sense’ to describe the infliction of a sexually transmitted disease as an assault. A prisoner could upon an indictment under the section be convicted of a common assault, because each offence (‘wounding’ and ‘infliucting . .
Cited – Regina v Wilson (Clarence); Regina v Jenkins HL 1983
The court considered the application of the section on alternative verdicts available to juries on a trial for attempted murder. The allegations in a charge under section 20 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861 or under section 9(1)(b) of the . .
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 – Regina v Chan-Fook CACD 15-Nov-1993
‘Actual bodily harm’ under the 1861 Act, may include injury to any part of the body, including internal organs, the nervous system and the brain. It is capable of including psychiatric injury, but not mere emotion such as fear, distress or panic. . .
Cited – Regina v Tabassum CACD 11-May-2000
The defendant had pretended to be medically qualified in order to obtain the opportunity to examine women’s breasts. He appealed against his conviction for indecent assault, saying that the complainants had consented to the examinations.
Held: . .
Cited – Regina v Cort CACD 7-Jul-2003
The defendant appealed a conviction for kidnapping, saying the victims’ absence of consent was not fundamental. Driving his car, he had stopped at bus stops, inviting women to get in saying falsely that the bus had been cancelled. He had with him . .
Cited – Bravery v Bravery 1954
A young husband with the consent of his wife, underwent a sterilisation operation, not so as to avoid the risk of transmitting a hereditary disease, or something similar, but to enable him to ‘have the pleasure of sexual intercourse without . .
Cited – Laskey, Jaggard and Brown v The United Kingdom ECHR 19-Feb-1997
A prosecution for sado-masochist acts was a necessary invasion of privacy to protect health. The Court found no violation where applicants were imprisoned as a result of sado-masochistic activities captured on video tape when police obtained . .
Cited – Regina v Emmett CACD 18-Jun-1999
The defendant appealed against conviction after being involved in sexual activity which he said was not intended to cause harm, and were said to be consensual, but clearly did risk harm. On the first occasion he tied a plastic bag over the head of . .
Cited – Rex v Donovan CCA 1934
The defendant was convicted of indecent assault and common assault after caning a 17 year old female complainant for the purposes of sexual gratification. The complainant suffered actual bodily harm, though the defendant was not charged with an . .

Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Barnes CACD 21-Dec-2004
The defendant appealed against a conviction for inflicting grievous bodily harm, after causing a serious leg injury in a football match when tackling another player.
Held: There was surprisingly little authority on when it was appropriate to . .
Cited – Konzani, Regina v CACD 17-Mar-2005
The defendant appealed conviction for inflicting grievous bodily harm on three women, by having unprotected sexual intercourse knowing that he was HIV positive, but without telling the women. Each contracted HIV. The allegation was that he had . .
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 – Golding, Regina v CACD 8-May-2014
The defendant appealed against his conviction on a guilty plea, of inflicting grievous bodily harm under section 20. He suffered genital herpes, but had unprotected sex and acknowledged acting recklessly. He said that the prosecution had failed to . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.196589

Greater Manchester Police v Andrews: Admn 23 May 2011

The CC appealed by case stated against a refusal of an order under the 2000 Act for the disclosure by the defendant of a cryptography key. The defendant had a history of sexual offences against children and had failed to keep to the terms of a Sexual Offences Prevention Order. He was found with indecent images of children on his computer, but pen drives also found were encrypted. The defendant had refused to release a password. He had since been convicted of other similar offences, but the applicant persisted with his request. The lower court asked whether it had been correct to refuse the request since here here was no evidence that the defendant had a software key.
Held: The appeal was allowed. The judge’s interpretation was too limited: ‘it was a perfectly legitimate inference to draw from the circumstances of recovery of the pen drives that the respondent might know encryption keys relating to the information stored on them.’ and ‘as stated in paragraph 24 of the judgment in S privilege against self-incrimination may be engaged by the requirement of disclosure, that is it may arise at the permission stage. Indeed it seems to me that it did in the present case. However I consider that, as in S, the privilege in this case is engaged only to a very limited extent. I consider that the interference to that limited extent is entirely proportionate to the public interest within the meaning of section 49(2)(c) of the Act and that, insofar as the judge decided otherwise, he was wrong to do so. ‘

Sir Anthony May P, McCombe J
[2011] EWHC 1966 (Admin)
Bailii
Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 49, Protection of Children Act 1978 1
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Saunders v The United Kingdom ECHR 17-Dec-1996
(Grand Chamber) The subsequent use against a defendant in a prosecution, of evidence which had been obtained under compulsion in company insolvency procedures was a convention breach of Art 6. Although not specifically mentioned in Article 6 of the . .
Cited – Regina v S and A CACD 9-Oct-2008
The defendant appealed against his conviction under the 2000 Act for failing to disclose the key used to encrypt a computer file. He was subject to a control order as a suspected terrorist. As the police raided his house, they found the key had been . .
Cited – Regina v Kearns CACD 22-Mar-2002
The defendant had failed to account for the disappearance of a substantial part of his estate to the official receiver following his bankruptcy. He appealed his conviction for failing to provide an account, saying that the requirement to provide . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.442194

Fowler v Padget: 8 Feb 1798

Mens Rea essential to crime

In order to constitute an act of bankruptcy by a trader in departing from his dwelling-house, it is not alone sufficient that a creditor should be thereby delayed, but the departure must also have been with that intent. The word ‘or’ in the statute of the 1 Jac. 1, e. 15, must be read ‘and.’
Lord Kenyon, CJ said: ‘It is a principle of natural justice and of our law, that actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea. The intent and act must both concur to constitute the crime’

Lord Kenyon, CJ
[1798] EngR 47, (1798) 7 TR 509, (1798) 101 ER 1103
Commonlii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Tolson CCR 11-May-1889
Honest and Reasonable mistake – No Bigamy
The defendant appealed against her conviction for bigamy, saying that she had acted in a mistaken belief.
Held: A man commits bigamy if he goes through a marriage ceremony while his wife is alive, even though he honestly and reasonably . .
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

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.348797

Joyce v Director of Public Prosecutions: HL 1948

The defendant was an American citizen but held a British passport. After the outbreak of war between Great Britain and Germany in 1939, he delivered from German territory broadcast talks in English hostile to Great Britain.
Held: His conviction for treason was confirmed.
Lord Jowitt LC referred to ‘the reciprocal duties of protection and allegiance’ between a citizen and the state, saying: ‘The contention is a different one: it is that by the holding of a passport he asserts and maintains the relation in which he formally stood, claiming a continued protection of the Crown and thereby pledging the continuance of his fidelity. In these circumstances I am clearly of the opinion that so long as he holds the passport he is within the meaning of the statute a man who, if he is adherent to the King’s enemies in the realm or elsewhere commits an act of treason . . Moreover the special value to the enemy of the appellant’s services as a broadcaster was that he could be represented as speaking as a British subject and his German workbook showed that it was in this character that he was employed, for which his passport was doubtless accepted as the voucher’.

Lord Jowitt LC
[1946] AC 347, [1946] 1 All ER 186
England and Wales
Cited by:
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 – Regina v Arrowsmith 1975
The defendant was charged with endeavouring to seduce a member of Her Majesty’s forces from his duty or allegiance to Her Majesty.
Held: A soldier owes allegiance to the Crown, whether he has taken the oath of allegiance or not. . .
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 . .
Cited – Manuel and Others v Attorney-General; Noltcho and Others v Attorney-General ChD 7-May-1982
The plaintiffs were Indian Chiefs from Canada. They complained that the 1982 Act which granted independence to Canada, had been passed without their consent, which they said was required. They feared the loss of rights embedded by historical . .
Cited – Miller and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Exiting The European Union SC 24-Jan-2017
Parliament’s Approval if statute rights affected
In a referendum, the people had voted to leave the European Union. That would require a notice to the Union under Article 50 TEU. The Secretary of State appealed against an order requiring Parliamentary approval before issuing the notice, he saying . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.198163

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 person making the threat had boasted of murders one of which at least was later verified.
Held: Lord Bingham said: ‘Duress is now properly to be regarded as a defence which, if established, excuses what would otherwise be criminal conduct.’ Baker and Ward must be overruled: ‘There need not be foresight of coercion to commit crimes, although it is not easy to envisage circumstances in which a party might be coerced to act lawfully.’ The policy of the law must be to discourage association with known criminals, and it should be slow to excuse the criminal conduct of those who do so. If a person voluntarily becomes or remains associated with others engaged in criminal activity in a situation where he knows or ought reasonably to know that he may be the subject of compulsion by them or their associates, he cannot rely on the defence of duress to excuse any act which he is thereafter compelled to do by them. As to the nature of the confession under s76(2), section 76(1), read with section 82(1), requires the court to interpret a statement in the light of the circumstances when it was made. A purely exculpatory statement (e.g. ‘I was not there’) is not within the scope of section 76(1). It is not a confession within the meaning of section 76. The safeguards of section 76 are not applicable. But the safeguards of section 78 are available.

Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Steyn, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Baroness Hale of Richmond, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood
[2005] UKHL 22, Times 21-Mar-2005, [2005] 2 AC 467, [2005] 2 WLR 709, [2005] 4 All ER 685
Bailii, House of Lords
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 76(1), Human Rights Act 1998 3
England and Wales
Citing:
On Appeal from – Regina v Z CACD 27-Feb-2003
The defendant appealed his conviction, saying the judge had misdirected the jury as to his defence of duress. He had worked as a driver and minder in an escort agency whose owner came to be associated with a man who claimed to him responsibility for . .
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 – Hibbert v The Queen 1995
(Canada) Defence of duress. . .
Cited – Regina v Cole CACD 21-Feb-1994
Pending clarification, the defence of duress is not to be extended. As to necessity as a defence, the peril relied on in this case to support the plea of necessity lacked imminence and the degree of directness and immediacy required of the link . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions for Northern Ireland v Lynch HL 1975
The House considered the availability of duress as a defence on a charge of aiding and abetting murder. Referring to the basic elements of criminal liability, mens rea and actus reus: ‘Both terms have, however, justified themselves by their . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Regina v Abdul-Hussain; Regina v Aboud; Regina v Hasan CACD 17-Dec-1998
The law of the defence of duress arising out of threat or circumstances is in need of urgent parliamentary clarification. Appeals were allowed where the defendants hijacked an airplane in order to escape deportation to a hostile country. ‘The . .
Cited – Regina v Gotts HL 3-Jun-1992
The defendant had been convicted of attempted murder, and appealed the rejection of his defence of duress.
Held: The defence of duress is not available to an accused facing a charge of attempted murder as a matter of policy, since it would not . .
Cited – Regina v Hudson and Taylor CACD 17-Mar-1971
Two teenage girls committed perjury by failing to identify the defendant. When prosecuted they pleaded duress, on the basis that they had been warned by a group, including a man with a reputation for violence, that if they identified the defendant . .
Cited – Regina v Ruzic 2001
(Canada) ‘Verification of a spurious claim of duress may prove difficult. Hence, courts should be alive to the need to apply reasonable, but strict standards for the application of the defence.’ . .
Cited – Regina v Conway 1989
The defendant said that he had driven recklessly because he was in fear for his life and that of his passenger.
Held: The court was bound by Willer to rule that a defence of duress was available. It was convenient to refer to this type of . .
Cited – Regina v Howe etc HL 19-Feb-1986
The defendants appealed against their convictions for murder, saying that their defences of duress had been wrongly disallowed.
Held: Duress is not a defence available on a charge of murder. When a defence of duress is raised, the test is . .
Cited – Perka v The Queen 1984
(Canada) The court analysed the defence of necessity. The concept of necessity is used as an excuse for conduct which would otherwise be criminal. The defence arose where, realistically, the individual had no choice, where the action was . .
Cited – Regina v Graham (Paul) CACD 18-Dec-1981
The defence of duress requires establishment of a reasonable belief. In judging the accused’s response the test is: ‘have the prosecution made the jury sure that a sober person of reasonable firmness, sharing the characteristics of the defendant, . .
Cited – Regina v Fitzpatrick CANI 1977
The court considered the defence of duress: ‘A person may become associated with a sinister group of men with criminal objectives and coercive methods of ensuring that their lawless enterprises are carried out and thereby voluntarily expose himself . .
Cited – Regina v Sharpe 1987
A member of a gang of robbers sought to establish a defence of duress. The trial judge had directed the jury ‘but in my judgment the defence of duress is not available to an accused who voluntarily exposes and submits himself to illegal compulsion . . .
Cited – Regina v Shepherd CACD 2-Jan-1987
The court considered the direction to be given on a defence of duress: ‘ . . .. where a person has voluntarily, and with knowledge of its nature, joined a criminal organisation or gang which he knew might bring pressure on him to commit an offence . .
Cited – Regina v Ali CACD 14-Nov-1994
The appellant said he become involved in drug dealing and become indebted to his supplier, X, who had given him a gun and told him to obtain the money from a bank or building society the following day, failing which he would be killed. The appellant . .
Overruled – Regina v Baker and Ward CACD 31-Mar-1999
The appellants claimed that they had been specifically instructed to rob the particular store which they were convicted of robbing, and did so under duress. The trial judge had directed the jury: ‘A person cannot rely on the defence of duress if he . .
Cited – Regina v Heath CACD 7-Oct-1999
The appellant claimed that he had become indebted to a drug supplier, and that he had been compelled by threats of physical violence to collect the consignment of drugs which gave rise to his conviction. His defence of duress failed at trial.
Cited – Regina v Harmer CACD 12-Dec-2001
The defendant claimed duress saying that he had become indebted to his drugs supplier and had been forced to commit the crimes. He said he did not foresee that he might be required to commit crimes for the supplier.
Held: The court did not . .
Cited – Regina v Safi (Ali Ahmed); Regina v Ghayur; Regina v Shah; Regina v Showaib; Regina v Mohammidy; Regina v Shohab; Regina v Ahmadi; Regina v Safi (Mahammad Nasir); Regina v Kazin CACD 6-Jun-2003
The defendants appealed convictions after rejection of their defence of duress. They had hijacked an aeroplane in Afghanistan, and surrendered eventually at Stansted. They said they were acting under duress, believing they had no other way of . .
Affirmed – Regina v Sat-Bhambra CACD 1989
The defendant was accused of importing heroin. He challenged use of his recorded interviews saying he was suffering hypoglycaemia from his diabetes at the time. The judge excluded later interviews for this reason, but the defendant challenged the . .
Cited – Regina v Fulling CACD 1987
It was alleged that evidence had been obtained by police oppression. She had at first refused to answer questions, but an officer talked to her during a break between interviews, telling her that her lover had been having an affair. The . .
Cited – Hui Chi-ming v The Queen PC 5-Aug-1991
(Hong Kong) The defendant was charged with aiding and abetting a murder. A, carrying a length of water pipe and accompanied by the defendant and four other youths, seized a man and A hit him with the pipe, causing injuries from which he died. No . .
Cited – Customs and Excise Commissioners v Harz and Power; Regina v Harz and Power HL 1967
The rule that a confessional statement is not admissible if it was induced by a fear of prejudice or a hope of advantage exercised or held out by a person in authority applies equally where the inducement does not relate to the actual or . .

Cited by:
Cited – Quayle and others v Regina, Attorney General’s Reference (No. 2 of 2004) CACD 27-May-2005
Each defendant appealed against convictions associated variously with the cultivation or possession of cannabis resin. They sought to plead medical necessity. There had been medical recommendations to move cannabis to the list of drugs which might . .
Applied – Coats, Regina v CACD 24-Jul-2013
The defendant had been convicted of importing drugs. She denied knowledge of the offence and denied any coercion. Another person awaiting her at the airport was later convicted of an unassociated murder. She now appealed sayng that she had been . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Human Rights

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.223640

Bala and Others, Regina v: CACD 10 May 2016

The court was asked whether parties to a polygamous marriage recognised in Nigeria could be exempt thereby from a charge as co-conspirators because of s2 of the 1977 Act. The judge had held the marriage invalid after finding that the defendant was domiciled in the UK.
Held: The appeal failed. The word ‘spouse’ in the 1977 Act clearly referred only to somebody within a marriage recognised under UK law. There had been ample evidence that the defendant was UK domiciled at the time of the offence, and that the judge had been correct not to leave that issue to the jury.

Davis LJ, Gilbart J
[2016] EWCA Crim 560, [2016] WLR(D) 253
Bailii, WLRD
Criminal Law Act 1977 1 2, Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 42 11
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Hyde v Hyde 1860
Parties to a polygamous marriage are not entitled as between themselves to any matrimonial relief under English law. . .
Cited – Hussain v Hussain CA 1983
A marriage celebrated outside England under a system of law permitting polygamy is not to be regarded as polygamous for the purpose of s.11(d) (or presumably for other purposes) if neither spouse had capacity to enter into a second marriage, such . .
Cited – Bellinger v Bellinger HL 10-Apr-2003
Transgendered Male/Female not to marry as Female
The parties had gone through a form of marriage, but Mrs B had previously undergone gender re-assignment surgery. Section 11(c) of the 1973 Act required a marriage to be between a male and a female. It was argued that the section was incompatible . .
Cited – Laila Jhina Mawji and Another v The Queen PC 4-Dec-1956
Eastern Africa – The two defendants, parties to a valid polygamous marriage, appealed against a conviction of conspiracy to obstruct, prevent, pervert or defeat the course of justice by hiding a wall clock they knew was required for the purpose of . .
Cited – Regina v Junaid Khan CACD 1987
The court was asked whether a wife under an (actually) polygamous marriage, entered into under the rites of the Moslem religion, was competent to give evidence against her husband. It was conceded that ‘in English law generally’ the lady was not the . .
Cited – Regina v Pearce CACD 11-Dec-2001
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder. He said that the court had not allowed his alcoholism as a characteristic for the purposes of testing the defence of provocation, and that the evidence of his long standing partner should be . .
Cited – Regina v Pearce CACD 2002
An unmarried partner in a long-term relationship with the accused was a compellable witness against him even though, had they been married, she would not have been. The statutory provisions applied to husband and wife and no one else. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.564455

Sandhu v Regina: CACD 1 Jun 2012

The defendant appealed against conviction of possession of class A drugs with intent to supply. Quantities were found under the driver’s seat of the car he was driving. He said he was unaware of it and had been left there by friends. He said that evidence from surveillance of him should have been disclosed earlier.
Held: The appeal failed. On the basis of his defence statement, the prosecution argued that disclosure would not have helped the defence. That was correct. Text messages had properly been admitted even if only disclosed late. The prosecution case had been strong, and the defence fanciful.

Stanley Burnton LJ, Maddison J, Recorder of Preston
[2012] EWCA Crim 1187
Bailii
England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.459869

Regina v Sheer Metalcraft Ltd: 1954

The defendant company was charged with purchasing sheet metals at prices in excess of those permitted by Order. The defendant complained that the Order had been printed without the Schedules, but the Secretary of State had not given the necessary certificate to exempt the Schedule.
Held: The Statutory Instrument took effect after being made by the Minister and laid before Parliament. The omission of the certificate was a matter of procedure and did not invalidate the Order. However the burden of evidence was on the Crown to establish that at the time of the alleged contravention reasonable steps had been taken to bring the Order to those affected by it.

[1954] QB 586, [1954] 1 All ER 542, [1954] 1 QB 586, [1954] 2 WLR 777, (1954) 118 JP 190, (1954) 98 Sol Jo 253
Iron and Steel Process Order 1951, Statutory Instruments Act 1946
England and Wales

Crime, Constitutional

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.539329

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 the doctrine of transferred malice could be applied alongside that of joint enterprise. The prosecutor had argue for a parasitic accessory liability, but this was rejected on the baiss that the defendant could not be said to be on a joint venture wth the person attacking him. Each had been on their own separate, individual and diametrically opposed enterprises.
Held: The conviction was restored (Lord Kerr dissenting). An affray need involve no common purpose, and may therefore provide a foundation for parasitic accessory liability. However that issue did not arise here. The prosecution had relied upon such liability on the basis that the respondent could not aid and abet his own attempted murder, by virtue of the victim rule. The meaning of ‘victim’ under the 1977 Act should be restricted to persons of a class that the relevant Act is intended to protect. The defendant could not therefore claim its benefit.

Lord Phillips, President, Lord Brown, Lord Judge, Lord Kerr, Lord Clarke, Lord Dyson, Lord Wilson
[2012] 2 All ER 129, [2012] 2 WLR 17, [2012] 1 Cr App R 18, [2012] 1 AC 827, [2011] UKSC 59, UKSC 2010/0165
Bailii, SC Summary, SC, Bailii Summary
Accessories and Abettors Act 1861 8, Criminal Law Act 1977 2(1)
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Gnango, Regina v CACD 26-Jul-2010
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder. He had engaged in a street battle using guns. A bullet from an opponent killed an innocent passer by. The court was asked whether the principles of joint venture and transferred malice could . .
Cited – Regina v Coney QBD 18-Mar-1882
A public prize-fight was unlawful. Spectators were tried at Berkshire County Quarter Sessions with common assault. The Chairman of Quarter Sessions directed the jury to convict the spectators of common assault on the basis that having stayed to . .
Cited – Brown and Isaac v The State PC 29-Jan-2003
PC (Trinidad and Tobago) The defendants appealed their convictions for murder on a joint enterprise basis.
Held: If more than one person participates, in whatever capacity, in attacking a victim, each . .
Cited – Ultzen v Nicols 1894
The plaintiff went to eat in the defendant’s restaurant. He gave over his coat to the waiter, who hung it on a hook. It was stolen.
Held: The defendant was liable as a bailee for reward. He was guilty of negligence in the care of the coat. . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Regina v Tyrrell 1894
r_tyrrell1894
The court considered whether a girl between the ages of 13 and 16 could be convicted of aiding and abetting a male who had had unlawful sexual intercourse with her.
Held: A person for whose protection an offence has been created cannot be . .
Cited – A and Others (Joint Enterprise) v Regina CACD 15-Jul-2010
Hughes LJ analysed the authorities on the requirements to establish joint venture criminal liability saying: ‘the liability of D2 . . rests, as all these citations show, on his having continued in the common venture of crime A when he realises (even . .
Cited – Regina v Sharp; Regina v Johnson CCA 1957
There had been a fight between the two defendants in a public place in the presence of a large number of spectators. They were jointly indicted on a charge of affray and convicted. They appealed.
Held: The court considered the offence of . .
Cited – Rex v Hopwood CCA 1913
A person who, in an attempt tp commit suicide, instead kills another in that act, can be guilty of murder under the doctrine of transferred malice. . .
Cited – Regina v Button; Regina v Swain HL 1966
An affray may be carried out on private premises as well as in public places.
Lord Gardiner LC spoke of the revival of the ancient offence of affray, saying: ‘It was further argued that no practical purpose is served by re-establishing the law . .
Cited – Regina v Powell (Anthony) and Another; Regina v English HL 30-Oct-1997
When the court looked at the issue of foreseeability of murder in an allegation of joint enterprise, there was no requirement to show intent by the secondary party. The forseeability of the risk of the principal committing the offence from the point . .
Cited – Regina v Young And Webber 22-Sep-1838
When, upon a previous arrangement, and after there has been time for the blood to cool, two persons meet with deadly weapons, and one of them is killed, the party who occasions the death is guilty of murder, and the seconds also are equally guilty, . .
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 – Attorney-General’s Reference (No 3 of 1994) CACD 29-Nov-1995
The defendant was convicted of murder. He stabbed a pregnant woman, causing the premature birth and then death of her child.
Held: Murder is a possible charge for a wound inflicted on an infant en ventre sa mere, but dying after a live birth. . .
Cited – Pagett, Regina v CACD 3-Feb-1983
Jury Directions on Causation
The appellant shot at police officers who were attempting to arrest him for various serious offences. The appellant had with him a 16 year old girl who was pregnant by him. Against her will he used her body to shield him from any retaliation by the . .
Cited – Gray v Thames Trains and Others HL 17-Jun-2009
The claimant suffered severe psychiatric injured in a rail crash caused by the defendant’s negligence. Under this condition of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, the claimant had gone on to kill another person, and he had been detained under section . .
Cited – Regina v Moloney HL 21-Mar-1984
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder.
Held: The appeal was allowed and a conviction for manslaughter substituted.
Lord Bridge of Harwich discussed the case of Hyam: ‘But looking on their facts at the decided cases . .
Cited – Corr v IBC Vehicles Ltd HL 27-Feb-2008
The claimant’s husband had committed suicide. She sought damages for financial loss from his former employers under the 1976 Act. He had suffered a severe and debilitating injury working for them leading to his depression and suicide. The employers . .
Cited – Regina v Kennedy HL 17-Oct-2007
The defendant had been convicted of manslaughter. He had supplied a class A drug to a friend who then died taking it. The House was asked ‘When is it appropriate to find someone guilty of manslaughter where that person has been involved in the . .
Cited – Regina v Latif; Regina v Shahzad HL 23-Jan-1996
The defendant had been lured into the UK by the unlawful acts of customs officers. He claimed abuse of process.
Held: The category of cases in which the abuse of process principles can be applied is not closed. A customs officer committing an . .
Cited – Regina v Hancock and Shankland HL 27-Feb-1985
Two miners on strike had pushed a concrete block from a bridge onto a three-lane highway on which a miner was being taken to work by taxi. The concrete block hit the taxi and killed the driver. The defendants were charged with murder. They said they . .
Cited – Regina v Woollin HL 2-Apr-1998
The defendant appealed against his conviction for the murder of his child. He had thrown the child to the floor, hitting the head. He said that he had not intended to kill the child.
Held: On a murder charge, where the short direction on . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.465939

Regina v Lee: CACD 24 Jun 2010

The defendant pharmacist faced a charge of supplying a medicinal product with a misleading label, an offence under section 85 of the 1968 Act. Working as a locum in a busy supermarket pharmacy she had signed off a mislabelled prescription. The patient ended up in hospital. After directions as to the law, she pleaded guilty. She now appealed questioning whether she had supplied the drug in law, saying that the offence required to a sale or supply ‘in the course of a business carried on by him’.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The words of the section could not be ignored. The words directed the section at the business owner which she was not. It was argued that ‘business’ should be construed to include a professional practice. That argument was not accepted since it failed to address the issue of ownership clearly pointed to by the section. A person in the defendant’s position could still face prosecution for a lesser offence.
The court considered it ability to substitute a conviction for a lesser offence. The test set out in R v Ramzan was met in this case.

Aikens LJ, Royce J, Radford J
[2010] EWCA Crim 1404, WLRD 24-Jun-2010, [2010] WLR (D) 160, [2010] 2 Cr App Rep 26, (2010) 116 BMLR 147, [2011] 1 WLR 418
Bailii
Medicines Act 1968 85, Criminal Appeal Act 1968 3A(1), Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 40(1)(b)
England and Wales
Citing:
Applied – Ramzan and Others, Regina v CACD 21-Jul-2006
The court considered its power on allowing an appeal after a plea of guilty to substitute a conviction for an appropriate lesser offence.
Held: Hughes LJ said that section 3A of the 1968 Act imposed a two stage test. The court considering . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Health Professions, Criminal Practice

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.417794

Mitchell and Another, Regina v: CACD 4 Nov 2008

The appellant challenged their convictions as ancillary parties to a murder, particularly as to the joint enterprise direction. There had been a scuffle outside a pub. The appellant went away with others to a nearby house, and returned with them after they had armed themselves with a knuckleduster and CS sprays after which the attack was resumed and the death ensued.
Held: The issue was as to whether the incidents should be seen as two or as one. The defendant was part of the first. The judge had directed that the defendant had to have given some overt indication of her withdrawal. The direction was correct and the appeal failed.

Lord Justice Thomas
[2008] EWCA Crim 2552, [2009] Crim LR 287, [2009] 1 Cr App Rep 31
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – O’Flaherty and Others, Regina v CACD 10-Mar-2004
It is for the jury to decide the question as to what the defendant had joined up to in a joint enterprise case by considering the knowledge and actions of those involved. The jury would have to be sure before the defendant was convicted that the . .
Cited – Rahman and Others, Regina v HL 2-Jul-2008
The defendants appealed against their convictions for murder. None had themselves inflicted any violence, but were convicted as part of a joint enterprise. They said they had not known that the principal carried a knife. They said that the evidence . .
Cited – Chan Wing-Siu v The Queen PC 21-Jun-1984
The appellant and co-accused were charged with murder. They said they had gone to meet the deceased to collect a debt, but had been attacked with a knife by the deceased. Two of the three had knives and knew of the other knife.
Held: All were . .
Cited – Regina v Powell (Anthony) and Another; Regina v English HL 30-Oct-1997
When the court looked at the issue of foreseeability of murder in an allegation of joint enterprise, there was no requirement to show intent by the secondary party. The forseeability of the risk of the principal committing the offence from the point . .
Cited – Regina v Micthell and King CACD 1988
The court considered whether the defendants had continued to be involved in a criminal action where they were originally involved, but claimed to have ceased involvement.
Held: In considering whether a person had withdrawn, there must usually . .
Cited – Regina v Robinson CACD 3-Feb-2000
Otton LJ said as to whether a defendant continued to be involved in a joint enterprise: ‘it can only be in exceptional circumstances that a person can withdraw from a crime he has initiated. Similarly in those rare circumstances communication of . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.277391

Director of Public Prosecutions v Beard: HL 1920

The accused raped a girl aged thirteen whilst he was drunk. He placed his hand over her mouth to stop her screaming, but without any intention of injuring her. He caused her death by suffocation, and was convicted of murder. It was argued on his behalf that the trial judge had misdirected the jury by not telling the jury that if they were of opinion that the violent act which was the immediate cause of death was not intentional, but only accidental, they should return a verdict of manslaughter.
Held: The appeal failed.
Lord Birkenhead LC said: `the prisoner killed the child by an act of violence done in the course or in the furtherance of the crime of rape, a felony involving violence. The Court [of Criminal Appeal] held that by the law of England such an act was murder. No attempt has been made in Your Lordships’ House to displace this view of the law and there can be no doubt as to its soundness.’ Accordingly, in their Lordships’ opinion there is no substance in the first argument on behalf of the appellants.’ and
‘ Under the law of England as it prevailed until early in the 19th century voluntary drunkenness was never an excuse for criminal misconduct; and indeed the classic authorities broadly assert that voluntary drunkenness must be considered rather an aggravation than a defence. This view was in terms based upon the principle that a man who by his own voluntary act debauches and destroys his will power shall be no better situated in regard to criminal acts than a sober man.’ and
The decisions cited: ‘establish that where a specific intent is an essential element in the offence, evidence of a state of drunkenness rendering the accused incapable of forming such an intent should be taken into consideration in order to determine whether he had in fact formed the intent necessary to constitute the particular crime. If he was so drunk that he was incapable of forming the intent required he could not be convicted of a crime which was committed only if the intent was proved. . . In a charge of murder based upon intention to kill or to do grievous bodily harm, if the jury are satisfied that the accused was, by reason of his drunken condition, incapable of forming the intent to kill or to do grievous bodily harm … he cannot be convicted of murder. But nevertheless unlawful homicide has been committed by the accused, and consequently he is guilty of unlawful homicide without malice aforethought, and that is manslaughter: per Stephen J. in Doherty’s case (16 Cox C.C. 307). He concludes the passage: ‘ the law is plain beyond all question that in cases falling short of insanity a condition of drunkenness at the time of committing an offence causing death can only, when it is available at all, have the effect of reducing the crime from murder to manslaughter.’

Lord Birkenhead, LC
[1920] AC 479
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Rex v Betts and Ridley 1931
Betts and Ridley agreed to rob a man on thw way to the bank. Betts was to push him to the ground and snatch the bag, while Ridley waited nearby in a car. When snatching the bag, Betts struck the victim who later died. Betts and Ridley were both . .
Cited – Rex v Jarmain CCA 1946
The defendant, in robbing him, pointed his cocked pistol at the cashier. He claimed that he was thinking what to do but had no intention of pressing the trigger, but the gun went off and killed her.
Held: Pointing a loaded pistol at a person . .
Cited – Moses v The State PC 29-Jul-1996
(Trinidad and Tobago) The appellant had been convicted under the felony murder rule, where if a victim dies in the course of the defendant committing a felony, the defendant is guilty of murder.
Held: The distinction between felony and murder . .
Cited – WWF (World Wide Fund for Nature) and Another v World Wrestling Federation Entertainment Inc CA 2-Apr-2007
The parties had disputed use of the initals WWF, with a compromise reached in 1994 allowing primary use by the Fund with restricted use by the Federation. The Federation now appealed an award of damages made after a finding of a breach of the . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Majewski HL 1976
The defendant took a cocktail of drink and drugs and, whilst intoxicated, assaulted pub landlord. He said that he did not know what he was doing, and had no mens rea, that self-induced intoxication could be a defence to a charge of assault, and that . .
Cited – Regina v Kingston HL 22-Jul-1994
Involuntary Intoxication not a General Defence
The prosecutor appealed an acquittal on appeal of the defendant for sexual assault, saying that he had not had the necessary intent because of intoxication through drink and drugs. He said that a co-defendant had secretly administered drugs to him. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.188591

BL (Jamaica) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 13 Apr 2016

‘The central issue on this appeal is whether in its decision dated 6 February 2014 the Upper Tribunal (McCloskey J and UTJ Perkins) (‘the UT’) made an error of law in allowing an appeal by BL, a foreign convicted offender aged 31 years and a national of Jamaica, against the order of the First-tier Tribunal dismissing BL’s appeal against the deportation order dated 16 January 2013 made by the Secretary of State under section 32 of the Borders Act 2007.’

Arden, McFarlane, Macur LJJ
[2016] EWCA Civ 357
Bailii
England and Wales

Immigration, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.562147

ex parte Guardian Newspapers Ltd: CACD 30 Sep 1998

The defendants purported to serve a notice under Rule 24A(1) of the Crown Court Rules 1982 of an intention to apply for a hearing in camera of their application that the trial be stopped as an abuse of process.
Held: Where an application was to be made for a trial to be held in camera, an application to stay proceedings on the ground that the trial would be an abuse of process could itself be heard in camera. An order re ‘all or part of a trial’ included such application. It was said that the grounds for the judge’s decision were mre wide ranging than had been revealed. The words in the rule 24A meant what they said: ‘A notice that the relevant party intends to apply for an order that the relevant part of the trial process . . be held in camera for reasons of national security or for the protection of identity of a witness. This was not done. We appreciate that there may be rare cases where it might invalidate the very purpose of the application to specify which of the two grounds was being relied on and in such a case it would be proper for the party to use the language of the rule without being more specific.’
A criminal trial starts when the jury are sworn and the defendant is put in their charge.

Brooke LJ, Kay, Marurice Kay JJ
Times 09-Oct-1998, Gazette 14-Oct-1998, [1998] EWCA Crim 2670, [1999] 1 Cr App R 284, [1999] 1 WLR 2130
Bailii
Crown Court Rules 1982 24A(1)
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Regina v Guardian Newspapers Ltd CACD 15-Sep-1998
The defendants purported to serve a notice under Rule 24A(1) of the Crown Court Rules 1982 of an intention to apply for a hearing in camera of their application that the trial be stopped as an abuse of process.
Held: ‘This is not a formal . .

Cited by:
Cited – A and Others, Regina v; Regina v The Crown Court at the Central Criminal Court ex parte A Times Newspapers Ltd etc CACD 13-Jan-2006
The defendant was to be charged with offences associated with terrorism. He had sought stay of the trial as an abuse of process saying that he had been tortured by English US and Pakistani authorities. The judge made an order as to what parts of the . .
Cited – Norfolk County Council v Webster and others FD 1-Nov-2006
The claimants wished to claim that they were victims of a miscarriage of justice in the way the Council had dealt with care proceedings. They sought that the proceedings should be reported without the children being identified.
Held: A judge . .
Cited – Mohamed, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 4) Admn 4-Feb-2009
In an earlier judgment, redactions had been made relating to reports by the US government of its treatment of the claimant when held by them at Guantanamo bay. The claimant said he had been tortured and sought the documents to support his defence of . .
Cited – Kelly (A Minor) v British Broadcasting Corporation FD 25-Jul-2000
K, aged 16, had left home to join what was said to be a religious sect. His whereabouts were unknown. He had been made a ward of court and the Official Solicitor was appointed to represent his interests. He had sent messages to say that he was well . .
Cited – Turk (Deceased) v Regina CACD 6-Apr-2017
Defendant’s death stops trial immediately
At his trial for serious sexual offences, the jury passed a note to the judge saying that they had reached unanimous verdicts on several counts. The judge did not pass the note to counsel, but instead asked the jury to retire overnight to try again . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Crime, Media

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.155544

K v Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie, F v Belgium – Allegations De Crimes De Guerre: ECJ 2 May 2018

Free movement for those suspected of War Crimes

Grand Chamber – Citizenship of The European Union – Right To Move and Reside Freely Within The Territory of The Member States – Restrictions – Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Citizenship of the European Union – Right to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States – Directive 2004/38/EC – Second subparagraph of Article 27(2) – Restrictions on the right of entry and the right of residence on grounds of public policy, public security or public health – Expulsion on grounds of public policy or public security – Conduct representing a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental interests of society – Person whose asylum application has been refused for reasons within the scope of Article 1F of the Geneva Convention or Article 12(2) of Directive 2011/95/EU – Article 28(1) – Article 28(3)(a) – Protection against expulsion – Residence in the host Member State for the previous ten years – Imperative grounds of public security – Meaning

K Lenaerts P
ECLI:EU:C:2018:296, [2018] EUECJ C-331/16, [2018] WLR(D) 272
Bailii, WLRD
European

Crime, Immigration

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.609513

Regina v W: CACD 2 Mar 2010

The defendant appealed against his conviction for misconduct in public office. As a police officer he had used an official credit card to pay for personal items. He said that he believed this was allowed where he intended to discharge the debt. He said that the judge should have left the issue of whether his actions were dishonest to the jury.
Held: The appeal succeeded, and a retrial was ordered. The ingredients of the offence included a specific focus on the defendant’s state of mind, and in the absence of such a direction, the appeal must succeed: ‘when the crime of misconduct in a public office is committed in circumstances which involve the acquisition of property by theft or fraud, and in particular when the holder of a public office is alleged to have made improper claims for public funds in circumstances which are said to be criminal, an essential ingredient of the offence is proof that the defendant was dishonest.’

Lord Judge, Lord Chief Justice, Mr Justice Penry-Davey and Mr Justice Irwin
[2010] EWCA Crim 372, [2010] Crim LR 779, [2010] 3 WLR 165, [2010] QB 787, [2010] 1 Cr App R 28
Bailii, Times
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Rex v Borron 1820
A criminal information was applied for against a magistrate.
Abbott CJ said: ‘They [magistrates] are indeed, like every other subject of this kingdom, answerable to the law for the faithful and upright discharge of their trust and duties. But, . .
Cited – Regina v Llewellyn-Jones CACD 1968
The Registrar of a County Court was convicted of offences of misconduct in public office. The indictment charged ‘misbehaviour in a public office, contrary to common law’ and alleged that court orders had been made ‘with the intention of gaining . .
Cited – Regina v Dytham CACD 1979
A constable was 30 yards away from the entrance to a club, from which he saw a man ejected. There was a fight involving cries and screams and the man was beaten and kicked to death in the gutter outside the club. The constable made no move to . .
Cited – Attorney General’s Reference (No 3 of 2003) CACD 7-Apr-2004
Police Officers had been acquitted of misconduct in public office. They had stood by in a police station custody suite as a prisoner lay on the floor and died.
Held: The trial took place before R -v- G which had overruled Caldwell. The . .
Cited – Regina v Rimmington; Regina v Goldstein HL 21-Jul-2005
Common Law – Public Nuisance – Extent
The House considered the elements of the common law offence of public nuisance. One defendant faced accusations of having sent racially offensive materials to individuals. The second was accused of sending an envelope including salt to a friend as a . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.402485

Chargot Limited (T/A Contract Services) and Others, Regina v: HL 10 Dec 2008

The victim died on a farm when his dumper truck overturned burying him in its load.
Held: The prosecutor needed to establish a prima facie case that the results required by the Act had not been achieved. He need only establish that a risk of injury arose out of the state of affairs at the place of work, and need not point to a specific breach of any duty. It was then for the employer to establish any exception. The jury had accepted the case for the prosecution, which was that he was directly involved in the works and that the way they were carried on was subject to his specific instructions and control. The appeal failed.

Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Scott of Foscote, Lord Brown of Eaton-under Heywood, Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury
[2008] UKHL 73, [2009] 1 WLR 1, [2009] 2 All ER 645, [2009] ICR 263
Bailii, HL, Times
Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Chargot Ltd (T/A Contract Services) and Others, Regina v CACD 13-Dec-2007
The defendant company appealed against its conviction under the 1974 Act after a driver was buried under the load when his truck overturned on a work-site.
Held: The appeal failed. The policy of the 1974 Act was to impose a positive burden on . .
Cited – Nimmo v Alexander Cowan and Sons Ltd HL 1967
The employer was prosecuted under the 1961 Act.
Held: the burden of proving that it was not reasonably practicable to make and keep a place of work safe rested upon the defendant employer. If an exception was to be established, it was for the . .
Cited – Lockhart v Kevin Oliphant Ltd HCJ 1993
One of the company’s employees was electrocuted and died when a street lamp he was erecting touched an overhead power line. It was charged with a contravention of sections 2(1) and (2) and 33(1)(a) of the 1974 Act. The sheriff acquitted the . .
Cited – Regina v Board of Trustees of the Science Museum CA 26-May-1993
The appellants were convicted of failing to conduct their undertaking in such a way as to ensure, so far as was reasonably practicable, persons not in their employment were not exposed to risks to their health and safety. One of their buildings . .
Cited – Commission v United Kingdom (Social Policy) ECJ 18-Jan-2007
The Commission sought a declaration that, by restricting the duty of employers to care for the health and safety of their employees ‘so far as reasonably practicable’, the United Kingdom had failed to fulfil its obligations under article 5(1) and . .
Cited – Adamson T/A John Adamson and Sons v Procurator Fiscal, Lanark HCJ 31-Oct-2000
The appellant farmers were charged with a contravention of section 3(1) in respect that they failed to ensure that an Ayrshire bull which they kept in a field and attacked a man who was working on the grass verge of an adjacent public highway was . .
Cited – Regina v Brown (K) CACD 1984
Jury Directions: Common Element in Several Charges
The defendant was accused of fraudulently inducing the investment of money. inducing four people to acquire shares in a company by making misleading statements. The particulars given in the count identified five statements allegedly made by him in . .
Cited – Regina v Porter CACD 19-May-2008
Everyday risks may be outwith Health and Safety
The defendant appealed against his conviction under the 1974 Act. He was headmaster at a private school. A child of three jumped from steps in the playground injured his head and was taken to hospital where he contracted MRSA and died.
Held: . .
Cited – Sheldrake v Director of Public Prosecutions; Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002 HL 14-Oct-2004
Appeals were brought complaining as to the apparent reversal of the burden of proof in road traffic cases and in cases under the Terrorism Acts. Was a legal or an evidential burden placed on a defendant?
Held: Lord Bingham of Cornhill said: . .
Cited – Regina v Lambert HL 5-Jul-2001
Restraint on Interference with Burden of Proof
The defendant had been convicted for possessing drugs found on him in a bag when he was arrested. He denied knowing of them. He was convicted having failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that he had not known of the drugs. The case was . .
Cited – Regina v Johnstone HL 22-May-2003
The defendant was convicted under the 1994 Act of producing counterfeit CDs. He argued that the affixing of the name of the artist to the CD was not a trade mark use, and that the prosecution had first to establish a civil offence before his act . .
Cited – Davies v Health and Safety Executive CACD 18-Dec-2002
The court considered whether the reverse burden of proof in a statute creating offences is compatible with the presumption of innocence enshrined in Article 6(2) of the ECHR. The judge had ruled against a submission that section 40 was not . .
Cited – Wotherspoon v HM Advocate 1978
The Lord Justice General set out the requirements to establish an offence under section 37(4) of the Act. Where the officer of the company had no actual knowledge of the breach of the regulations, the question was whether he should have been put on . .
Cited – Attorney General’s Reference (No 1 of 1995); Regina v B; Regina v F CACD 30-Jan-1996
The offence of accepting an unauthorised deposit requires both knowledge of the act and an agreement to it. Where ‘consent’ is alleged against him, a defendant has to be proved to know the material facts which constitute the offence by the body . .
Cited – Regina v P Ltd and Another CACD 11-Jul-2007
A child had been injured when a load fell from a fork lift truck. It was said not to have been secured as required by Health and Safety Regulations. The company was to be prosecuted. The prosecutor appealed a preliminary ruling that in order to . .
Cited – Beckingham, Regina v CACD 22-Mar-2006
The court allowed the defendant’s appeal against her conviction under section 7 of the 1974 Act in relation to an outbreak of legionnaires disease traced to the cooling towers of an air-conditioning system for which she, the building owners’ . .
Appeal from – Chargot Ltd (T/A Contract Services) and Others, Regina v CACD 13-Dec-2007
The defendant company appealed against its conviction under the 1974 Act after a driver was buried under the load when his truck overturned on a work-site.
Held: The appeal failed. The policy of the 1974 Act was to impose a positive burden on . .

Cited by:
Cited – Baker v Quantum Clothing Group Ltd and Others SC 13-Apr-2011
The court was asked as to the liability of employers in the knitting industry for hearing losses suffered by employees before the 1989 Regulations came into effect. The claimant had worked in a factory between 1971 and 2001, sustaining noise induced . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health and Safety, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.278660

Rex v Saunders and Archer: 1573

Misdirected Poison remained Offence

A intended to kill his wife, and gave her a poisoned apple. She gave it her child who ate the apple and died. The defendant had not intended his daughter to eat the apple.
Held: A was guilty of the murder of his daughter, but his wife, who was ignorant of the poison was innocent.
‘for if I command one to kill JS and before the fact done I go to him and tell him that I have repented, and expressly charge him not to kill JS and he afterwards kills him, there I shall not be accessory to this murder, because I have countermanded my first command, which in all reason shall discharge me, for the malicious mind of the accessory ought to continue to do ill until the time of the act done, or else he shall not be charged; but if he had killed JS before the time of my discharge or countermand given, I should have been accessory to the death, notwithstanding my private repentance.’

(1573) 2 Plowd 473 Fost 371, 75 ER 706
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Becerra and Cooper CACD 1975
The defendants sought leave to appeal against their convictions for a brutal and horrific murder. Becerra suggeste dtat he had wanted to withdraw from the event before the murder took place.
Held: The appeal failed: ‘ in the circumstances then . .
Cited – Regina v Whitehouse 1941
(British Columbia) The court asked when a party to a joint enterprise may claim to have abandoned or withdrawn from that enterprise ‘Can it be said on the facts of this case that a mere change of mental intention and a quitting of the scene of the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.186600

In re Nielsen: HL 1984

The House considered the role of the metropolitan magistrate under section 9 and 10 of the 1870 Act in the context of an application for extradition under the treaty between Denmark and the United Kingdom. At section 9 hearings it had been the invariable practice, ‘so far as living memory stretches’, for the magistrate to receive evidence of the law of the requesting state designed to show that the offence of which the fugitive was accused in that state was ‘substantially similar’ or ‘similar in concept’ to the relevant extradition offence, as construed according to English law.
Held: In an application for extradition, it was for the Secretary of State to specify the crime or crimes for which the fugitive criminal’s extradition was being requested, and the District Judge had no jurisdiction to inquire into or receive evidence of the criminal law of the foreign state. It did not however follow that the District Judge was confined by the way in which the case was described in the order to proceed as to the category into which the appellant’s case fell.
The list of exradition crimes provided in the schedule, described the 19 ‘extradition crimes’ in general terms and popular language.
Lord Diplock said: ‘[T]he magistrate is not concerned with what provision of foreign criminal law (if any) is stated in the warrant to be the offence which the person was suspected of having committed and in respect of which his arrest was ordered in the foreign state.’

Lord Diplock
[1984] AC 606, [1984] 2 All ER 81, (1983) 79 Cr App R 1, [1984] 2 WLR 737
Extradition Act 1870 10
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – In re Guisto (application for a writ of Habeas Corpus) (Criminal Appeal from Her Majesty’s High Court of Justice) HL 3-Apr-2003
The applicant challenged an order for his extradition to the US. He had been convicted in his absence having absconded from bail.
Held: He had been arrested and held on the basis that he was a convicted person, but the procedure should have . .
Cited – Office of the King’s Prosecutor, Brussels v Cando Armas and others HL 17-Nov-2005
The defendant resisted extradition to Brussels saying that the offence had been committed in part in England. He had absconded and been convicted. Application was made for his return to serve his sentence. The offences associated with organisation . .
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 . .
Preferred – Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex Parte Admn 3-Mar-1997
The section imposed the conduct test as set out in Nielsen, not the narrower approach adopted in Aronson. . .
Cited – VB and Others v Westminster Magistrates SC 5-Nov-2014
Extraditions to follow normal open justice rules
Application was made by Rwanda for the extradition of four individuals to face crimes said to have been committed during their civil war. Witnesses were prepared to give evidence but only in private and not being seen by the representatives of . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Extradition

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.180427

Regina v The Director of Public Prosecutions, Ex Parte Manning, Ex Parte Melbourne: QBD 17 May 2000

The applicants sought judicial review of the decision of the Director not to prosecute anybody after the death of their brother in prison custody, and while under restraint by prison officers. The jury at a coroner’s inquest had returned a verdict of unlawful killing. A specialist senior caseworker in the CPS subsequently took a decision not to prosecute any of the officers of any offence arising out of the death, in particular unlawful act manslaughter, on the basis that he was not satisfied that the available evidence would provide a realistic prospect of conviction.
Held: The Director of Public Prosecutions is answerable to the Attorney General and to no one else. While the power of judicial review is to be sparingly exercised, the standard of review should not be set too high, since judicial review is the only means by which the citizen can seek redress against a decision not to prosecute and if the test were too exacting an effective remedy would be denied.

Lord Bingham of Cornhill LCJ said: ‘Authority makes clear that a decision by the Director not to prosecute is susceptible to judicial review . . But, as the decided cases also make clear, the power of review is one to be sparingly exercised. The reasons for this are clear. The primary decision to prosecute or not to prosecute is entrusted by Parliament to the Director as head of an independent, professional prosecuting service, answerable to the Attorney General in his role as guardian of the public interest, and to no-one else. It makes no difference that in practice the decision will ordinarily be taken by a senior member of the CPS, as it was here, and not by the Director personally. In any borderline case the decision may be one of acute difficulty, since while a defendant whom a jury would be likely to convict should properly be brought to justice and tried, a defendant whom a jury would be likely to acquit should not be subjected to the trauma inherent in a criminal trial. If, in a case such as the present, the Director’s provisional decision is not to prosecute, that decision will be subject to review by Senior Treasury Counsel who will exercise an independent professional judgment. The Director and his officials (and Senior Treasury Counsel when consulted) will bring to their task of deciding whether to prosecute an experience and expertise which most courts called upon to review their decisions could not match. In most cases the decision will turn not on an analysis of the relevant legal principles but on the exercise of an informed judgment of how a case against a particular defendant, if brought, would be likely to fare in the context of a criminal trial before (in a serious case such as this) a jury. This exercise of judgment involves an assessment of the strength, by the end of the trial, of the evidence against the defendant and of the likely defences. It will often be impossible to stigmatise a judgment on such matters as wrong even if one disagrees with it. So the courts will not easily find that a decision not to prosecute is bad in law, on which basis alone the court is entitled to interfere. At the same time, the standard of review should not be set too high, since judicial review is the only means by which the citizen can seek redress against a decision not to prosecute and if the test were too exacting an effective remedy would be denied.’

Lord Bingham of Cornhill LCJ, Morison J
[2000] EWHC Admin 342, [2001] 1 QB 330, [2000] Inquest LR 133, [2000] Po LR 172, [2001] HRLR 3, [2000] 3 WLR 463, [2000] EWHC 562 (QB), [2001] QB 330
Bailii, Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Director of Public Prosecutions, ex parte C QBD 1995
The plaintiff sought judicial review of the DPP’s decision not to prosecute a husband suspected of buggery.
Held: The application succeeded. The Respondent had failed to consider the criteria required by the Code. However, the power to review . .

Cited by:
Cited – Corner House Research and Campaign Against Arms Trade, Regina (on the Application of) v Director of the Serious Fraud Office and Another Admn 10-Apr-2008
The defendant had had responsibility to investigate and if necessary prosecute a company suspected of serious offences of bribery and corruption in the conduct of contract negotiations. The investigation had been stopped, alledgedly at the . .
Cited – Corner House Research and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v The Serious Fraud Office HL 30-Jul-2008
SFO Director’s decisions reviewable
The director succeeded on his appeal against an order declaring unlawful his decision to discontinue investigations into allegations of bribery. The Attorney-General had supervisory duties as to the exercise of the duties by the Director. It had . .
Cited – Morrison v The Independent Police Complaints Commission and Others Admn 26-Oct-2009
The claimant made a complaint of a serious assault by the police, by the use of a Taser. The defendant had referred the complaint to the IPCC, who said that they should investigate it themselves. The claimant said that to accord with his human . .
Cited – Bryant and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis Admn 23-May-2011
Several claimants sought leave to bring judicial review of decisions taken by the defendant in the investigation of suggestions that their telephone answering systems had been intercepted by people working for the News of the World. They said that . .
Cited – Da Silva, Regina (on the Application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another Admn 14-Dec-2006
An innocent bystander had been shot dead by police mistaking him for a suicide bomber. The claimant, a cousin, challenged decisions not to prosecute any officer for murder or manslaughter or any other criminal offence.
Held: Review was . .
Cited – NXB v Crown Prosecution Service QBD 12-Mar-2015
The claimant, saying that she had been abused as a child by another, sought damages alleging breach of her human rights after the defendant failed to prosecute her attacker: ‘it is the Claimant’s case that the CPS made a series of rushed, . .
Cited – F, Regina (on The Application of) v The Director of Public Prosecutions and Another Admn 24-Apr-2013
Application for judicial review of the refusal of the Director of Public Prosecutions to initiate a prosecution for rape and/or sexual assault of the claimant by her former partner. The claimant said that she had initially consented to sex with her . .
Cited – Loughlin, Re Application for Judicial Review SC 18-Oct-2017
The court was asked as to the circumstances in which sentences passed on offenders who have given assistance to prosecuting authorities should be referred back to the sentencing court under section 74 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Constitutional, Police, Judicial Review

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.135939

Orr, Regina v: CACD 7 Jul 2016

The court considered whether the trial court had correctly identified the test for fitness to plead.
Held: The appeal was allowed: ‘Once the issue of fitness to plead has been raised it must be determined. In this case, the judge explicitly found that the appellant had been fit to participate in his trial up to the point of cross examination and thereby implicitly determined that the appellant was no longer able to fully participate in his trial within the ‘Pritchard’ refined criteria. In these circumstances, the procedure to be adopted was clearly set out by section Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964, 4A . . this is a statutory mandatory requirement which cannot be avoided by the court’s general discretion to order proceedings otherwise, however beneficial to the defendant they may appear. It follows that, in this case, the jury should not have been allowed to return a verdict, other than a verdict of acquittal if they were not satisfied on the evidence already given in the trial that the appellant did the act charged against him.’

Macur LJ, Flaux J, Goldstone QC HHJ
[2016] EWCA Crim 889, [2016] WLR(D) 378, [2016] 4 WLR 132
Bailii, WLRD
Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 4A
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – John M, Regina v CACD 14-Nov-2003
The trial judge had directed the jury, determining fitness to plead, with an extended formulation of the test, including the appellant’s ability to give evidence, if he wished, in his own defence. This facility had been described to mean that ‘the . .
Cited – Rex v Pritchard 21-Mar-1836
A person, deaf and dumb, was to be tried for a capital felony the Judge ordered a Jury to be impanneled, to try whether he was mute by the visitation of God, the jury found that he was so. The jury were then sworn to try whether he was able to . .
Cited – SC v The United Kingdom ECHR 15-Jun-2004
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1 ; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient ; Costs and expenses (domestic proceedings) – claim rejected ; Costs and expenses . .
Cited – Walls, Regina v CACD 3-Mar-2011
The court was asked whether, after the appellant had been tried and convicted at the Crown Court in Coventry on 26 November 2008 of offences of sexual assault on a child under 13, the court should admit under s.23 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968 . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.567376

Goodwin, Regina v: CACD 5 Oct 2018

Qualifying loss of self control

The defendant appealed from his conviction for murder saying that, being attacked with a hammer by the now deceased, he had taken it and hit the victim with it, having lost his self control. He said that the court had not allowed that he had brought sufficient evidence of that loss acting as a qualifying trigger, to put the defence to the jury.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. The judge’s application of the first two stages may had faults, but his overall conclusion was correct. The statutory defence arose when the defendant was in fear of serious violence, and a defence of self defence need not of itself amount to a qualifying loss of control.
‘We think that in a case of this kind there are a number of general considerations which need to be borne in mind which we should list. In doing so, we do not proffer this list as being necessarily an exhaustive list of the kinds of points that a trial judge, where such an issue arises, will need to bear in mind.
(i) The required opinion is to be formed as a common sense judgment based on an analysis of all the evidence.
(ii) If there is sufficient evidence to raise an issue with respect to the defence of loss of control, then it is to be left the jury whether or not the issue had been expressly advanced as part of the defence case at trial.
(3) The appellate court will give due weight to the evaluation (‘the opinion’) of the trial judge, who will have had the considerable advantage of conducting the trial and hearing all the evidence and having the feel of the case. As has been said, the appellate court ‘will not readily interfere with that judgment’.
(4) However, that evaluation is not to be equated with an exercise of discretion such that the appellant court is only concerned with whether the decision was within a reasonable range of responses on the part of the trial judge. Rather, the judge’s evaluation has to be appraised as either being right or wrong: it is a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ matter.
(5) The 2009 Act is specific by section 54(5) and (6) that the evidence must be ‘sufficient’ to raise an issue. It is not enough if there is simply some evidence falling short of sufficient evidence.
(6) The existence of a qualifying trigger does not necessarily connote that there will have been a loss of control.
(7) For the purpose of forming his or her opinion, the trial judge, whilst of course entitled to assess the quality and weight of the evidence, ordinarily should not reject evidence which the jury could reasonably accept. It must be recognised that a jury may accept the evidence which is most favourable to a defendant.
(8) The statutory defence of loss of control is significantly differently from and more restrictive than the previous defence of provocation which it has entirely superseded.
(9) Perhaps in consequence of all the foregoing, ‘a much more rigorous evaluation’ on the part of the trial judge is called for than might have been the case under the previous law of provocation.
(10) The statutory components of the defence are to be appraised sequentially and separately; and
(11) And not least, each case is to be assessed by reference to its own particular facts and circumstances.’

Davis LJ, King, May JJ
[2018] EWCA Crim 2287, [2018] WLR(D) 667
Bailii, WLRD
Coroners and Justice Act 2009 54 55
England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.628205

Regina v Scarlett: CACD 18 May 1993

The force used by the defendant in self defence was justified even though there was a mistake as to the extent to which force was required. ‘If the mental element necessary to prove an assault is an intention to apply unlawful force to the victim, and the accused is to be judged according to his mistaken view of the facts, whether that mistake was on an objective view reasonable or not, we can see no logical basis for distinguishing between a person who objectively is not justified in using force, but mistakenly believes that the circumstances call for a degree of force objectively regarded as unnecessary. Where, as in the present case, an accused is justified in using some force and can only be guilty of an assault if the force used is excessive, the jury ought to be directed that he cannot be guilty of an assault unless the prosecution prove that he acted with the mental element necessary to constitute his action on assault, that is that the defendant intentionally or recklessly applied force to the person of another. (See R v Venna [1975] 3 All ER 788 at 793, [1976] 1 QB 421 at 429 per James LJ)
Further, they should be directed that the accused is not to be found guilty merely because he intentionally or recklessly used force which they consider to have been excessive. They ought not to convict him and unless they are satisfied that the degree of force used was plainly more than was called for by the circumstances as he believed them to be and, provided he believed the circumstances called for the degree of force used, he is not to be convicted even if his belief was unreasonable.’

Beldam LJ
Times 18-May-1993, [1993] 4 All ER 629, 98 Cr App R 290
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Beckford v The Queen PC 15-Jun-1987
(Jamaica) Self defence permits a defendant to use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances as he honestly believed them to be. ‘If then a genuine belief, albeit without reasonable grounds, is a defence to rape because it negatives the . .
Cited – Regina v Venna CACD 31-Jul-1975
An assault is an act by which the defendant intentionally or recklessly causes the complainant to apprehend immediate, or to sustain, unlawful personal violence. The jury ought to be directed that the defendant cannot be guilty of an assault unless . .

Cited by:
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Armstrong-Braun Admn 5-Oct-1998
A building site was subject to a requirement to move great crested newts before work could proceed. The defendant, a local councillor interfered to prevent a digger destroying the land until the newts had been moved. He appealed his conviction for . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.87676

Jaggard v Dickinson: QBD 1980

The defendant broke two windows and damaged a curtain in the house of a stranger. She was drunk. She was charged under the 1971 Act, but she raised her honest but drunken and mistaken belief that the house belonged to a friend who would have consented to her breaking in and causing damage having told the defendant she could use the house as if it were her own. She was convicted on the basis that as the crime was one of basic intent and as her intoxication was voluntary, Majewski directed that the court should ignore evidence of intoxication on the intent issue. She appealed and her conviction was quashed.
Held: ‘Belief’ in section 5(2) remained subjective despite the decision in Caldwell. Majewski had not said intoxication was irrelevant to the fact of the defendant’s state of mind, rather it held that regardless of the defendant’s state of mind, that for policy reasons he or she should be precluded from relying on a defence of self-induced intoxication. Such considerations did not apply where Parliament had, as here in section 5(2), specifically isolated a subjective element.

Mustill J
[1980] 3 All ER 716, [1981] QB 527
Criminal Damage Act 1971 1(1) 5(2)
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Majewski HL 1976
The defendant took a cocktail of drink and drugs and, whilst intoxicated, assaulted pub landlord. He said that he did not know what he was doing, and had no mens rea, that self-induced intoxication could be a defence to a charge of assault, and that . .
Cited – Commissioner of Police v Caldwell HL 19-Mar-1981
The defendant got drunk and set fire to the hotel where he worked. Guests were present. He was indicted upon two counts of arson. He pleaded guilty to the 1(1) count but contested the 1(2) charge, saying he was so drunk that the thought there might . .

Cited by:
Cited – Dowds v Regina CACzD 22-Feb-2012
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder, saying that he should have been allowed to rely on a plea of diminished responsibility given the changes to section 2 of the 1957 Act introduced in 2009. He said that his alcoholism should . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.189976

Iain Rooney v Procurator Fiscal, Stirling: HCJ 14 May 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 57
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510261

Tencho Hristov Andonov Mohammed Asam Siddique Her Majesty’S Advocate v Her Majesty’S Advocate Deyan Nikolov: HCJ 5 Mar 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 27
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510249

Alastair Adamson v Her Majesty’S Advocate: HCJ 2 May 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 70
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510258

Michael Macdonald v Procurator Fiscal Dornoch: HCJ 13 Mar 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 48
Bailii
Scotland

Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510248

Craig Douglas v Her Majesty’S Advocate: HCJ 21 May 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 56
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510259

Muhammed Abbas v Her Majesty’s Advocate: HCJ 22 May 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 55
Bailii
Scotland

Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510264

Jason Marcus v Her Majesty’S Advocate: HCJ 9 May 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 58
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510262

Luke Sinclaire v Procurator Fiscal Stranraer: HCJ 16 Apr 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 65
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510254

Muirhead and Mckenzie v Her Majesty’s Advocate: HCJ 14 Mar 2013

The defendants appealed against their convictions for conspiracy to assault, by means of sending an explosive device in the post to a famous football manager.

Lord Phllip
[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 31
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510250

James Thomson v Her Majesty’s Advocate: HCJ 30 Apr 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 60
Bailii
Scotland

Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510252

Matthew Mccann v Her Majesty’S Advocate: HCJ 5 Mar 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 29
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510247

William Beck v Her Majesty’S Advocate: HCJ 30 Apr 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 51
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510257

Her Majesty’S Advocate v PB VW: HCJ 8 May 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJ – 71
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510260

Joseph Anthony Henderson v Her Majesty’S Advocate: HCJ 5 Mar 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 28
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510246

Paul Shaw Hadden v Her Majesty’S Advocate: HCJ 18 Apr 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 61
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510255

Hainey v Her Majesty’s Advocate: HCJ 18 Apr 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 47
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510253

Corby John Clark v Her Majesty’S Advocate: HCJ 5 Mar 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 32
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510245

Ryder v Her Majesty’s Advocate: HCJ 18 Apr 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 63
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510256

Craigie v Procurator Fiscal, Dundee: HCJ 19 Feb 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 38
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510227

Andrew Mitchell v Her Majesty’S Advocate: HCJ 5 Mar 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 30
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510241

Gary Turner v Procurator Fiscal, Portree: HCJ 21 Feb 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 40
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510233

David Allison v Procurator Fiscal, Dumbarton: HCJ 21 Feb 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 42
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510231

Patrick Shields v Her Majesty’S Advocate: HCJ 27 Feb 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 25
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510236

Shahid Ramzan v Her Majesty’S Advocate: HCJ 24 Feb 2012

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 21
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510224

Swan v Procurator Fiscal, Falkirk: HCJ 19 Feb 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 37
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510228

Colin Anthony Matthew Robinson v Procurator Fiscal, Dumfries: HCJ 14 Feb 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 43
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510229

Donald Kergan v Procurator Fiscal, Glasgow: HCJ 28 Feb 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 33
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510232

Appeal Under Section 26 of The Extradition Act 2003 By Pawel Rypula v The Lord Advocatge for and On Behalf of The Polish Authorities: HCJ 5 Dec 2012

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 19
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510226

Anthony Godden v Procurator Fiscal Kirkcaldy: HCJ 1 Mar 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 24
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510242

W,D, v Procurator Fiscal, Airdrie: HCJ 14 Feb 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 44
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510239

A,B, v Her Majesty’S Advocate: HCJ 5 Mar 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 59
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510240

JGW v Her Majesty’s Advocate: HCJ 27 Jul 2012

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 15
Bailii
Scotland

Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510225

Her Majesty’s Advocate v GQ MM: HCJ 19 Feb 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 23
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510234

Koterbski v Procurator Fiscal Aberdeen: HCJ 19 Feb 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 34
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510230

Pazhiyoor v Procurator Fiscal, Hamilton: HCJ 19 Feb 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 39
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510238

Patrickyoung v Procurator Ficsal, Dumfries: HCJ 21 Feb 2013

[2013] ScotHC HCJAC – 41
Bailii

Scotland, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510237

Taxquet v Belgium: ECHR 16 Nov 2010

(Grand Chamber)

Jean-Paul Costa, P
[2010] ECHR 1806, 926/05, [2011] Crim LR 236, (2012) 54 EHRR 26
Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights
Citing:
See Also – Taxquet v Belgium ECHR 13-Jan-2009
. .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510100

Hobson v Regina: CACD 23 May 2013

Appeal against conviction and sentence in respect of two counts of indecent assault. Hecomplained that the judge’s treatment of his failure to give evidence had been unclear.
Held: Whilst the judge’s remark may have been unfortunate, in its context the judge had correctly stated the approach to be taken by the jury.

Elias LJ, Wilkie J, Pert QC HHJ
[2013] EWCA Crim 819, [2013] WLR(D) 215, [2013] 1 WLR 3733, [2013] 2 Cr App R 27, [2014] Crim LR 83
Bailii, WLRD
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Cowan and Another CACD 12-Oct-1995
Detailed directions were provided for the judge to give to a jury where a defendant chooses not to give evidence in his defence in the Crown Court.
Lord Taylor of Gosforth said: ‘1. The judge will have told the jury that the burden of proof . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510029

X Ltd, Regina v: CACD 23 May 2013

The prosecutor appealed after the judge at the crown court had found no case to answer on a prosecution of the company under the 2008 Regulations. The company had sold a home security system to an elderly and vulnerable man. His family found that he had no understanding of the existence of the system. The salesman had said that burglaries in the last twelve months had increased by 46% in the area. The data was derived from published police statistics, and the judge had found no unfair representation.
Held: The Crown’s appeal was allowed. The judge had mischaracterised the statistics. The police statistics did not necessarily support the statements made by the salesman.
The judge placed weight on the absence of evidence that at least one director knew of the circumstances that lead to the transaction with this particular customer. In our judgment, his approach was too narrow: the question was whether the depth of the evidence relating to this one customer led to the inference that the way in which the company operated (through at least one of its controlling minds) demonstrated reckless disregard for the requirements of professional diligence generally: in that regard, it matters not that the particular controlling mind cannot be identified.

Leveson LJ, Foskett J, Sir Geoffrey Grigson
[2013] EWCA Crim 818
Bailii
Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Jabber CACD 2006
As to the case of Kwan Ping Bong, Moses LJ said: ‘Read literally, Lord Diplock’s dicta might be understood to be saying that an inference was only to be regarded as compelling if all juries, assumed to be composed of those who are reasonable, would . .
Cited – Zentrale zur Bekampfung unlauteren Wettbewerbs eV v Plus Warenhandelsgesellschaft mbH ECJ 14-Jan-2010
ECJ Directive 2005/29/EC – Unfair commercial practices – National legislation laying down a prohibition in principle of commercial practices which make the participation of consumers in a lottery conditional on . .
Unpersuasive – Regina (London Borough of Tower Hamlets) v Christopher Steele 2012
(Crown Court at Snaresbrook) The court acceded to the submission on trying a charge under the 2008 Regulations, that there was no case to answer in the context of a contract for building services with a consumer on the basis that such a contract did . .
Cited – Regina v Galbraith CCA 1981
Rejection of Submission of No Case to Answer
The defendant had faced a charge of affray. The court having rejected his submission of having no case to answer, he had made an exculpatory statement from the dock. He appealed against his conviction.
Held: Lord Lane LCJ said: ‘How then . .
Cited – Airtours plc v Shipley CACD 1994
. .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510030

Beazley, Regina v: CACD 20 Mar 2013

[2013] EWCA Crim 567
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 30 October 2021; Ref: scu.509985

Birmingham City Council v James and Another: CA 17 May 2013

The appellant challenged an injunction under the 2009 Act excluding him from parts of Birmingham. He said that it prevented him visiting his mother.
Held: The appeal failed. Moore-Bick LJ said: ‘It was for the judge to decide on the basis of the evidence before him whether in order to prevent the appellant from engaging in gang-related violence it was necessary to exclude him from the Newtown area of Birmingham altogether or whether he could be allowed to go there from time to time, and if so, subject to what restrictions. There was plenty of evidence to support the conclusion that the gang of which the appellant was a leading member had its base in the Newtown area and that for a time its leading members, including the appellant, used to meet at his mother’s house.’
Jackson LJ said that there was no ‘closest fit’ principle: ‘The courts . . now have at their disposal three different pre-emptive orders for dealing with violent or anti-social behaviour. Defence counsel can, of course, invite the first instance court to impose a less draconian order than that which is sought by the applicant. The judge will then exercise his or her discretion to make whatever order seems most appropriate in the circumstances, provided that the statutory conditions are satisfied. The judge may direct that an application may be made either to a different court or for a different remedy from that which is claimed. On such an application, the judge may exercise his powers under s. 1B of the 1998 Act (which enables an ASBO to be made in the course of ongoing county court proceedings). There is, however, no ‘closest fit’ principle which cuts down the court’s statutory powers to make pre-emptive orders. ‘
Maurice Kay VP, Moore-Bick, Jackson LJJ
[2013] EWCA Civ 552, (2013) 177 JP 425, [2014] 1 WLR 23, [2013] WLR(D) 185
Bailii, WLRD
Policing and Crime Act 2009 34
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Birmingham City Council v Shafi and Another CA 30-Oct-2008
The Council appealed a finding that the court did not have jurisdiction to obtain without notice injunctions to control the behaviour of youths said to be creating a disturbance, including restricting their rights to enter certain parts of the city . .
Cited – Clingham (formerly C (a minor)) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea; Regina v Crown Court at Manchester Ex parte McCann and Others HL 17-Oct-2002
The applicants had been made subject of anti-social behaviour orders. They challenged the basis upon which the orders had been made.
Held: The orders had no identifiable consequences which would make the process a criminal one. Civil standards . .
Cited – Samaroo and Sezek v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 17-Jul-2001
Two foreign nationals with leave to remain in this country committed serious crimes. The Secretary of State ordered their deportation.
Held: Where the deportation of a foreigner following a conviction here, would conflict with his human . .
Cited – Swindon Borough Council v Redpath CA 11-Sep-2009
The defendant appealed against the issuing of an anti-social behaviour order for ‘housing-related conduct’ where the conduct alleged had no connection with council tenants or property.
Held: The appeal failed. ‘Housing-related’ meant ‘directly . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 October 2021; Ref: scu.509308

Regina v Kallakis and Another: CACD 16 May 2013

[2013] EWCA Crim 709
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 30 October 2021; Ref: scu.509269

Norris v Regina: CACD 15 May 2013

[2013] EWCA Crim 712
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 30 October 2021; Ref: scu.509259

Odegbune and Others v Regina: CACD 15 May 2013

[2013] EWCA Crim 711
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 30 October 2021; Ref: scu.509260

Dossett, Regina v: CACD 14 May 2013

[2013] EWCA Crim 710
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 27 October 2021; Ref: scu.509131

Hussain, Regina v: CACD 10 May 2013

[2013] EWCA Crim 707
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 27 October 2021; Ref: scu.509132

Regina v Turnbull: CACD 18 Apr 2013

[2013] EWCA Crim 676
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 27 October 2021; Ref: scu.509130

Warwick, Regina v: CANI 15 Mar 2013

[2013] NICA 13
Bailii
Northern Ireland

Updated: 27 October 2021; Ref: scu.503548

Mahil and Others v Regina: CACD 9 May 2013

[2013] EWCA Crim 673
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 27 October 2021; Ref: scu.503508

S, Regina v: CACD 3 May 2002

Whether defendant unfit to plead
[2002] EWCA Crim 1091
Bailii

Updated: 27 October 2021; Ref: scu.341555

Laku, Regina v: CACD 16 Jul 2008

Appeal from conviction of making a false representation to obtain benefits.
Latham LJ VP CACD
[2008] EWCA Crim 1745
Bailii
Social Security Administration Act 1992 111A
England and Wales

Updated: 27 October 2021; Ref: scu.272286

The Attorney-General v Lockwood: CEC 22 Jan 1842

The keeper of a beer-shop, licensed under statute is liable to the penalties imposed by 56 Cleo. 3, e. 58, s. 2, for having in his possession any of the prohibited articles therein specified, or any other article or preparation to be used as a substitute for malt or hops. –In order to render such a person liable to those penalties, for having in his possession any of the articles enumerated in the 56 Geo. 3, e. 58, s. 2, it is unnecessary to aver or prove, either that the party had them in his possession to be used as a substitute for malt or hops, or that he had them in his possession with any criminal intent. But where the information is for having in his possession any article not designated by name in that section, it is necessary to shew that it was intended to be used as a substitute for malt and hops in the making of beer,
[1842] EngR 164, (1842) 9 M and W 378, (1842) 152 ER 160
Commonlii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – Lockwood v The Attorney-General 28-Jun-1842
Alderson B said: ‘The rule of law, I take it, upon the construction of all statutes . . is, whether they be penal or remedial, to construe them according to the plain, literal, and grammatical meaning of the words in which they are expressed, unless . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 October 2021; Ref: scu.307119

May and Others, Regina v: CACD 28 Jan 2005

Lord Justice Keene
[2005] EWCA Crim 97, [2005] 1 WLR 2902, [2005] 2 Cr App Rep (S) 67, [2005] 3 All ER 523, (2005) 149 SJLB 176
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – May, Regina v HL 14-May-2008
The defendant had been convicted of involvement in a substantial VAT fraud, and made subject to a confiscation order. He was made subject to a confiscation order in respect of the amounts lost to the fraud where he was involved, but argued that the . .
See Also – Regina v May and others CACD 2005
The fact that an appeal is pending does not operate so as to suspend the operation of any sentence or order. . .
Cited – Regina v Green HL 14-May-2008
The appellant had been found to have received criminal proceeds along with another. He appealed against an order making him liable for the full amount.
Held: The appeal failed. The defendant’s argument did not face the finding that he had been . .
See Also – May, Regina v CACD 5-May-2005
Appeal from sentence for causing death by dangerous driving. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 October 2021; Ref: scu.249338

Regina v Dytham: CACD 1979

A constable was 30 yards away from the entrance to a club, from which he saw a man ejected. There was a fight involving cries and screams and the man was beaten and kicked to death in the gutter outside the club. The constable made no move to intervene. He drove away when the hubbub had died down, stating that he was due off and was going off. He demurred to the indictment on the ground that it disclosed no offence since misconduct of an officer of justice involved malfeasance or at least a misfeasance involving an element of corruption and not merely non-feasance as alleged in the indictment.
Held: The conviction of the officer for wilful neglect to perform a duty was upheld.
Lord Widgery CJ said: ‘the allegation made was not of mere non-feasance but of deliberate failure and wilful neglect . . This involves an element of culpability which is not restricted to corruption or dishonesty but which must be of such a degree that the misconduct impugned is calculated to injure the public interest so as to call for condemnation and punishment. Whether such a situation is revealed by the evidence is a matter that a jury has to decide. It puts no heavier burden upon them than when in more familiar contexts they are called upon to consider whether driving is dangerous or a publication is obscene or a place of public resort is a disorderly house’
Shaw LJ, Lord Widgery CJ, McNeill J
[1979] 1 QBD 722, (1979) 69 Crim App R 722
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Rex v Wyat 1705
Where an officer [a constable] neglects a duty incumbent upon him, either by common law or statute, he is for his default indictable. . .
Cited – Rex v Bembridge 1783
The defendant was an accountant in the office and place of receiver and paymaster general. The court was asked whether he held a public office.
Held: A man who holds a public office is answerable criminally to the king for misbehaviour in that . .
Cited – Regina v Llewellyn-Jones CACD 1968
The Registrar of a County Court was convicted of offences of misconduct in public office. The indictment charged ‘misbehaviour in a public office, contrary to common law’ and alleged that court orders had been made ‘with the intention of gaining . .

Cited by:
Cited – Osman v The United Kingdom ECHR 28-Oct-1998
Police’s Complete Immunity was Too Wide
(Grand Chamber) A male teacher developed an obsession with a male pupil. He changed his name by deed poll to the pupil’s surname. He was required to teach at another school. The pupil’s family’s property was subjected to numerous acts of vandalism, . .
Cited – Attorney General’s Reference (No 3 of 2003) CACD 7-Apr-2004
Police Officers had been acquitted of misconduct in public office. They had stood by in a police station custody suite as a prisoner lay on the floor and died.
Held: The trial took place before R -v- G which had overruled Caldwell. The . .
Cited – Hertfordshire Police v Van Colle; Smith v Chief Constable of Sussex Police HL 30-Jul-2008
Police Obligations to Witnesses is Limited
A prosecution witness was murdered by the accused shortly before his trial. The parents of the deceased alleged that the failure of the police to protect their son was a breach of article 2.
Held: The House was asked ‘If the police are alerted . .
Cited – Regina v W CACD 2-Mar-2010
The defendant appealed against his conviction for misconduct in public office. As a police officer he had used an official credit card to pay for personal items. He said that he believed this was allowed where he intended to discharge the debt. He . .
Cited – Regina v Bowden (T) CACD 24-Feb-1995
The defendant, a maintenance manager, was accused of misconduct in public office. He had caused works to be carried out by other employees of the local authority on premises occupied by a friend when such works were not required under the . .
Cited – ABC and Others, Regina v CACD 26-Mar-2015
Several defendants sought to appeal against convictions. They were public officials accused of having committed misconduct in public office in the sale of information relating to their work to journalists. The journalists were convicted of . .
Cited – Shum Kwok Sher 2002
Final Court of Appeal, Hong Kong. A senior government officer had used his position to provide preferential treatment to a company and its directors to whom he was related. He appealed against his conviction for misconduct in public office.
Cited – Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police SC 8-Feb-2018
Limits to Police Exemption from Liability
The claimant, an elderly lady was bowled over and injured when police were chasing a suspect through the streets. As they arrested him they fell over on top of her. She appealed against refusal of her claim in negligence.
Held: Her appeal . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 October 2021; Ref: scu.183671

Rex v Wyat: 1705

Where an officer [a constable] neglects a duty incumbent upon him, either by common law or statute, he is for his default indictable.
(1705) 1 Salk 380
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Attorney General’s Reference (No 3 of 2003) CACD 7-Apr-2004
Police Officers had been acquitted of misconduct in public office. They had stood by in a police station custody suite as a prisoner lay on the floor and died.
Held: The trial took place before R -v- G which had overruled Caldwell. The . .
Cited – Regina v Dytham CACD 1979
A constable was 30 yards away from the entrance to a club, from which he saw a man ejected. There was a fight involving cries and screams and the man was beaten and kicked to death in the gutter outside the club. The constable made no move to . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 October 2021; Ref: scu.196544

Regina v Llewellyn-Jones: CACD 1968

The Registrar of a County Court was convicted of offences of misconduct in public office. The indictment charged ‘misbehaviour in a public office, contrary to common law’ and alleged that court orders had been made ‘with the intention of gaining improper personal advantage and without proper regard to the interest of X’. It was submitted that, in the absence of allegations of fraud or dishonesty in the counts of the indictment, the ingredients necessary to constitute a criminal offence were not present.
Held: Lord Parker CJ said: ‘the court proposed to take the same line as the trial judge did when he came to rule on the argument presented before him, when he said that he did not propose to attempt to give an exhaustive definition of what was covered by misbehaviour in a public office, it being sufficient to say that in his opinion what was alleged and what he proposed should be alleged in the count was sufficient. This court proposed to take the same line and to look at the words of the indictment, and looking at those words the court is satisfied that at any rate what is there alleged, if proved, would constitute the offence at common law of misbehaviour in a public office.
Assuming in [Counsel’s] favour that there must be some element of dishonesty involved, a dishonest motive, a fraudulent motive, it seems to this court that that is inherent in the words of the count. It is really impossible to conceive of a case in which action of this sort is not taken with the intention of gaining personal advantage and without regard to the interests of the beneficiary. It is true the word ‘dishonestly’ or ‘fraudulently’ does not there appear, but it is inherent in the description of the offence.’
Lord Parker CJ
[1968] 1 QB 429
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Rex v Bembridge 1783
The defendant was an accountant in the office and place of receiver and paymaster general. The court was asked whether he held a public office.
Held: A man who holds a public office is answerable criminally to the king for misbehaviour in that . .
Cited – Rex v Borron 1820
A criminal information was applied for against a magistrate.
Abbott CJ said: ‘They [magistrates] are indeed, like every other subject of this kingdom, answerable to the law for the faithful and upright discharge of their trust and duties. But, . .

Cited by:
Cited – Attorney General’s Reference (No 3 of 2003) CACD 7-Apr-2004
Police Officers had been acquitted of misconduct in public office. They had stood by in a police station custody suite as a prisoner lay on the floor and died.
Held: The trial took place before R -v- G which had overruled Caldwell. The . .
Cited – Regina v Dytham CACD 1979
A constable was 30 yards away from the entrance to a club, from which he saw a man ejected. There was a fight involving cries and screams and the man was beaten and kicked to death in the gutter outside the club. The constable made no move to . .
Cited – Regina v W CACD 2-Mar-2010
The defendant appealed against his conviction for misconduct in public office. As a police officer he had used an official credit card to pay for personal items. He said that he believed this was allowed where he intended to discharge the debt. He . .
Cited – Regina v Bowden (T) CACD 24-Feb-1995
The defendant, a maintenance manager, was accused of misconduct in public office. He had caused works to be carried out by other employees of the local authority on premises occupied by a friend when such works were not required under the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 October 2021; Ref: scu.196547

Kirby, Regina v: CACD 21 Feb 2019

Breach of non-molestation order that was subsequently set aside because of a procedural irregularity.
Held: The appeal failed. Singh LJ based the decision on ‘a long-standing principle of our law that there is an obligation to obey an apparently valid order of a court unless and until that order is set aside. This is a crucial feature of a civilized society which has respect for the rule of law’
[2019] EWCA Crim 321, [2019] 4 WLR 131
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Majera, Regina (on The Application of v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 20-Oct-2021
The Court was asked whether the Government can lawfully act in a manner which is inconsistent with an order of a judge which is defective, without first applying for, and obtaining, the variation or setting aside of the order. The appellant had been . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 October 2021; Ref: scu.634197

Gerger v Turkey: ECHR 8 Jul 1999

Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 10; Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion, lack of jurisdiction); Violation of Art. 6-1 (independent and impartial tribunal); Not necessary to examine other complaint under Art. 6-1; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings
There could be no breach of article 14 where the law concerned provided that ‘people who commit terrorist offences . . will be treated less favourably with regard to automatic parole than persons convicted under the ordinary law’, because ‘the distinction is made not between different groups of people, but between different types of offence.’
[1999] ECHR 46, 24919/94
Worldlii, Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights 14
Human Rights
Cited by:
Cited – RJM, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions HL 22-Oct-2008
The 1987 Regulations provided additional benefits for disabled persons, but excluded from benefit those who had nowhere to sleep. The claimant said this was irrational. He had been receiving the disability premium to his benefits, but this was . .
Cited – Stott, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice SC 28-Nov-2018
The prisoner was subject to an extended determinate sentence (21 years plus 4) for 10 offences of rape. He complained that as such he would only be eligible for parole after serving two thirds of his sentence rather than one third, and said that . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 October 2021; Ref: scu.165728

Paterson v Procurator Fiscal: HCJ 11 Jun 2002

[2002] ScotHC 74
Bailii
Scotland

Updated: 27 October 2021; Ref: scu.189816

NDMC v Her Majesty’s Advocate: HCJ 5 Feb 2014

[2014] ScotHC HCJAC – 12
Bailii
Scotland

Updated: 26 October 2021; Ref: scu.526745

Coventry City Council v Vassell: Admn 17 Jun 2011

The court was asked as to the mental elements the prosecution have to prove to convict a housing benefit claimant for non-disclosure of a change in circumstances that affects his benefit entitlement.
Hickinbottom J
[2011] EWHC 1542 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 26 October 2021; Ref: scu.440862

Bates, R v: CACD 5 Apr 2006

[2006] EWCA Crim 1015
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 26 October 2021; Ref: scu.460491

Pesti And Frodl v Austria: ECHR 18 Jan 2000

Sir Nicolas Bratza, P
27618/95, [2000] ECHR 712
Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights
Human Rights

Updated: 26 October 2021; Ref: scu.440280

Regina v Murray and Others: CCNI 2 Jun 2011

[2011] NICC 26
Bailii
Northern Ireland

Updated: 26 October 2021; Ref: scu.440591

Ryle, Regina v: CACD 4 Feb 2021

renewed application for a lengthy extension of time in which to apply for leave to appeal against conviction
[2021] EWCA Crim 270
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 25 October 2021; Ref: scu.659652

Murphy and Others, Regina v: CACD 4 Feb 2021

Appeal from convictions of supplying controlled drugs and from sentences.
[2021] EWCA Crim 190
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 25 October 2021; Ref: scu.659650

Cooper v Wrexham Magistrates Court and Another: Admn 5 Jul 2010

The defendant appealed against his conviction for theft. In retirement, the magistrates had called for the aid of their clerk, informing him that they intended to find the defendant not guilty.
Munby LJ, Langstaff J
[2010] EWHC 2226 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 25 October 2021; Ref: scu.424080