Category: Crime

Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty To Animals v Chester Crown Court: Admn 17 May 2006

Defendants had been convicted of maltreatment of horses. The crown court had overturned a permanent ban on keeping horses, substituting a limit of keeping 25 horses with a conditional discharge. The prosecutor now appealed.
Held: The court had no power to make the order it had in setting a number of animals. The power to grant a conditional discharge is dependent on its being inexpedient to inflict punishment, and that the power to annex conditions is not at large but is confined to a condition of committing no offence during a specified period. The conditions were quashed and remitted for resentencing.
Sedley LJ, beatson J
[2006] EWHC 1273 (Admin)
Bailii
Protection of Animals Act 1911 1(1)(a), Protection of Animals (Amendment) Act 1954 1(1), Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 12(1)
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Nash v Birmingham Crown Court Admn 18-Feb-2005
The defendant who had had 75 cats in her home with consequences that they had been not well looked after was convicted of animal cruelty. She had been ‘given a conditional discharge’, one of the conditions being that she could not thereafter look . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 August 2021; Ref: scu.242300

Boxall, Regina v: CACD 22 May 2020

Renewed application for leave to appeal against conviction and sentence of and for conspiracy to supply a controlled drug of Class A, cocaine. A co-defendant, Dean Melody, had previously pleaded guilty to the same conspiracy. The quantity of cocaine involved was 33 kilogrammes, with a wholesale value of around pounds 1 million and a street value of around pounds 2.6 million.
[2020] EWCA Crim 688
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 25 August 2021; Ref: scu.652578

Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty To Animals, Regina (on the Application Of) v Shinton: Admn 30 Jun 2003

The defendant was licensed to set Larson traps to catch magpies. The traps worked by keeping a magpie as a decoy to attract others. The evidence was that the trapped magpie suffered distress and injury because the trap was so small as not to allow it to spread its wings.
Held: The defendant was not liable under the 1981 Act, but in the light of the evidence, was liable under the 1911 Act.
Leveson J
[2003] EWHC 1696 (Admin), Times 23-Jul-2003
Bailii
Protection of Animals Act 1911 1(1)(a), Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 8(1)
England and Wales
Citing:
Applied – Barnard v Evans 1925
‘causing unnecessary suffering’ under the Act means doing something which it is not reasonably necessary to do and which is not justified. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 August 2021; Ref: scu.185616

Director of Public Prosecutions v Ray: HL 25 Jul 1973

The defendant ordered a meal at a restaurant believing his companion would lend him the money to pay. He later decided to seek to avoid payment and took a opportunity to escape.
Held: The appeal was allowed and the conviction restored. The ordering of the meal amounted to a representation that he could pay and intended to pay. The representation was continuing. The question was at what point if any he deceived the waiter as to his intention.
Lord Reid said (dissenting) that the mere waiting for an opportunity to escape was not a deception: ‘Deception is an essential ingredient of the offence. Dishonest evasion of an obligation to pay is not enough. I cannot see that there was, in fact, any more than that in this case.’ and ‘So the accused, after he changed his mind, must have done something intended to induce the waiter to believe that he still intended to pay before he left. Deception, to my mind, implies something positive.’
Lord Reid, Lord MacDcrmott, Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest, Lord Hodson, Lord Pearson
[1973] UKHL 3, [1974] AC 370
Bailii
Theft Act 1968 16
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – In re London and Globe Finance Corporation Ltd ChD 1903
A company which had gone from voluntary winding up, first to winding up under supervision and then to compulsory winding up, with the official receiver as liquidator. The company’s former managing director was suspected of fraud, but the law . .
Cited – Trail v Baring CA 1864
(Orse Traill v Baring) The court considered a misrepresentation by conduct before contract. Turner LJ said: ‘I take it to be quite clear, that if a person makes a representation by which he induces another to take a particular course, and the . .
Cited – With v O’Flanagan CA 1936
When negotiating to enter into a contract, a person may have a duty to disclose material facts which come to his notice before the conclusion of a contract if they falsify a representation previously made by him. A representation as to the profits . .
Cited – Regina v Jones CCR 1898
There must be some deceit spoken, written or acted to constitute a false pretence. . .

Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Allen HL 13-Jun-1984
Parliamentary Records Admiisible
The defendant had left his hotel without paying, and was charged with making off without payment. He said he intended to pay the bill later after making some business transactions. The judge had directed the jury that the intent to avoid payment . .
Cited – Silverman, Regina v CACD 31-Mar-1987
The defendant appealed against his conviction for offences of for dishonesty. He was said ti have grossly overcharged two spinster sisters for work on their home. He said that the judge had failed properly to put his defence before the jury.
Updated: 24 August 2021; Ref: scu.248602

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, went through the green customs channel and was detained. The trunk contained cannabis. He was charged with two offences, a criminal offence of illegally importing narcotics and a ‘customs offence’ of smuggling prohibited goods. At trial and on appeal he was acquitted of the former but convicted of smuggling, an offence relating to any act of smuggling or undeclared import: a person in possession of contraband goods ‘shall be deemed liable for the offence’. The accused may exculpate himself by establishing force majeure resulting ‘from an event responsibility for which is not attributable to him and which it was absolutely impossible for him to avoid’. The ‘almost irrebutable presumption’ . . was said to be incompatible with article 6.
Held: Contracting States may apply the criminal law to an act where it is not carried out in the normal exercise of one of the rights protected under the Convention, and accordingly, to define the constituent elements in the resulting offence. Contracting States may penalise a simple or objective fact as such, irrespective of whether it results from criminal intent or from negligence. Examples of such offences may be found in the laws of the Contracting States. However, the Applicant was not convicted for mere possession of unlawfully imported prohibited goods. Article 392(1) of the Customs Code does not appear under the heading ‘classification of customs offences’ but under that of ‘criminal liability’. Under this provision a conclusion is drawn from a simple fact, which in itself does not necessarily constitute a petty or a more serious offence, that the ‘criminal liability’ for the unlawful importation of the goods, whether they are prohibited or not, or the failure to declare them, lies with the person in whose possession they are found. It infers therefrom a legal presumption on the basis of which (the French Courts) found the Applicant guilty of smuggling prohibited goods . . This shift from the idea of accountability in criminal law to the notion of guilt shows the very relative nature of such a distinction. It raises a question with regard to Article 6.2 of the Convention. The Convention does not prohibit presumptions of fact in principle, but does require certain limits as regards criminal law. If 6.2 merely laid down a guarantee to be respected by the courts in the conduct of legal proceedings, its requirements would in practice overlap with the duty of impartiality imposed in paragraph 1. Above all, the national legislature would be free to strip the trial court of any genuine power of assessment and deprive the presumption of innocence of its substance, if the words ‘according to law’ were construed exclusively with reference of domestic law. Such a situation could not be reconciled with the object and purpose of Article 6, which, by protecting the right to a fair trial and in particular the right to be presumed innocent, is intended to enshrine the fundamental principle of the rule of law. Article 6.2 does not therefore regard presumptions of fact or of law provided for in the criminal law with indifference. It requires States to confine them within reasonable limits which take into account the importance of what is at stake and maintain the rights of the defence
R Ryssdal P
(1988) 13 EHRR 379, 10519/83, [1988] ECHR 19
Worldlii, Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights 6.2
Human Rights
Cited by:
Cited – Drummond v Regina CACD 7-Mar-2002
The appellant had been convicted of causing death by careless driving with excess alcohol. He said that he had taken alcohol after stopping driving but before being tested. He challenged the weight of the burden of proof ascribed by the statute. The . .
Cited – Regina v Muhamad CACD 19-Jul-2002
The appellant had been convicted of an offence under the section in that as a bankrupt, he ‘in the two years before the petition, materially contributed to, or increased the extent of, his insolvency by gambling or by rash and hazardous . .
Cited – Regina v Johnstone HL 22-May-2003
The defendant was convicted under the 1994 Act of producing counterfeit CDs. He argued that the affixing of the name of the artist to the CD was not a trade mark use, and that the prosecution had first to establish a civil offence before his act . .
Cited – Lynch v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 8-Nov-2001
The defendant challenged a conviction for having a locked bladed article in his possession in a public place, on the basis that it placed on him a burden of proof contrary to the convention.
Held: Salabiaku permits a reverse onus but requires . .
Cited – 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 – 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 – Attorney General v Malta 10-Dec-1991
The applcant challenged a provision which imposed criminal liability on a director of a body which had committed a criminal offence ‘unless he proves that the offence was committed without his knowledge and that he exercised all due diligence to . .
Cited – Regina v G CACD 12-Apr-2006
The defendant pleaded guilty to the rape of a twelve year old girl on the agreed basis that he had believed her to be 15, but had been advised that given her age, his belief was immaterial. He now appealed saying that the presumption infringed his . .
Cited – Regina v G (Secretary of State for the Home Department intervening) HL 18-Jun-2008
The defendant was fifteen. He was convicted of statutory rape of a 13 year old girl, believing her to be 15. He appealed saying that as an offence of strict liability he had been denied a right to a fair trial, and also that the offence charged was . .
Cited – Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission v Gibbons; Same v Karoonian CA 30-Oct-2012
Non-resident parents in each case appealed against suspended orders of imprisonment for non-payment of child support. They argued that the procedures used were indistinguishable from those held to be human rights non-compliant in Mubarak.
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 . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 24 August 2021; Ref: scu.165029

Regina v Ireland: CACD 14 May 1996

Silent telephone calls which resulted in psychiatric damage to the victim could constitute an ‘assault occasioning actual bodily harm’ for the purposes of section 47 of the 1861 Act. Swinton Thomas LJ said: ‘The early cases pre-date the invention of the telephone. We must apply the law to conditions as they are in the twentieth century’. ‘In our judgment the making of a telephone call followed by silence, or a series of telephone calls, is capable of amounting to a relevant act for the purposes of section 47. The act consists in the making of the telephone call, and it does not matter whether words or silence ensue. There is no doubt that the telephone calls made the victims apprehensive. Equally, there is no doubt that they caused them psychological damage. In our judgment, once the fear and the damage are established, then when a telephone call is made by the appellant and the victim lifts the telephone and then knows that the man is telephoning them yet again, they will be apprehensive of suffering the very psychological damage from which they did suffer, namely palpitations, difficulty in breathing, cold sweats, anxiety, inability to sleep, dizziness, stress, and the like. As in the case of Smith, these victims would not know what the appellant was going to do next. In most cases an assault is likely to involve direct physical violence to the body. However, the fact that the violence is inflicted indirectly, causing psychological harm, does not render the act to be any less an act of violence. Nor, in our judgment, is it necessary that there should be an immediate proximity between defendant and victim. Fear can be instilled as readily over the telephone as it can through the window. In our judgment repetitious telephone calls of this nature are likely to cause the victims to apprehend immediate and unlawful violence. ‘
Swinton Thomas LJ, Longmore LJ
Times 22-May-1996, Gazette 19-Jun-1996, [1996] EWCA Crim 441, [1997] QB 114
Bailii
Offences Against the Person Act 1861 47
England and Wales
Citing:
Appealed to – Regina v Burstow, Regina v Ireland HL 24-Jul-1997
The defendant was accused of assault occasioning actual bodily harm when he had made silent phone calls which were taken as threatening.
Held: An assault might consist of the making of a silent telephone call in circumstances where it causes . .
Cited – Tuberville v Savage 1669
Tuberville laid his hand upon his sword saying, ‘If it were not Assize time I would not take such language.’ It was held that the act could have amounted to an assault but for ‘the declaration that he would not assault him, the Judges being in . .
Cited – Fagan v Metropolitan Commissioner 31-Jul-1968
The defendant was told by a police officer to park up his car. He did so, but stopped with his wheel, trapping the officer’s foot. The magistrates were unable to decide whether the parking on the officer’s foot was deliberate, but agreed that . .
Cited – Manchester Diocesan Council for Education v Commercial and General Investments Ltd 1969
The school governors were required to obtain consent before selling land formerly used as a school.
Held: The court rejected a submission that that consent was a necessary pre-requisite for a contract could be made at all: ‘Reliance is placed . .
Cited – Smith v Chief Superintendent, Woking Police Station 1983
The defendant entered the garden of a private house and looked through the windows of the house occupied by the victim. She was terrified. The Justices concluded that the defendant had deliberately frightened the victim, and that that constituted an . .
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 Savage; Director of Public Prosecutions v Parmenter HL 7-Nov-1991
The first defendant had been convicted of wounding. She had intended to throw beer over her victim, but her glass slipped from her hand, and cut the victim. The second defendant threw his three year old child in the air and caught him, not realising . .
Approved – Barton v Armstrong 1969
(Supreme Court of New South Wales) The claimant sought damages alleging assault by the making of telephone calls.
Held: Threats made over the telephone were capable of amounting to an assault. Taylor J: ‘Mr. Staff’s first and second . .

Cited by:
Appeal from – Regina v Burstow, Regina v Ireland HL 24-Jul-1997
The defendant was accused of assault occasioning actual bodily harm when he had made silent phone calls which were taken as threatening.
Held: An assault might consist of the making of a silent telephone call in circumstances where it causes . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 24 August 2021; Ref: scu.148105

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. ‘Similarly an injury can be caused to someone by injuring their health; an assault may have the consequence of infecting the victim with a disease or causing the victim to become ill. The injury may be internal and may not be accompanied by any external injury.’ . . and: ‘In any case where psychiatric injury is relied upon as the basis for an allegation of bodily harm, and the matter has not been admitted by the defence, expert evidence should be called by the prosecution. It should not be left to be inferred by the jury from the general facts of the case. In the absence of appropriate expert evidence, a question whether or not the assault occasioning psychiatric injury should not be left to the jury . . There is no reason for refusing to have regard to psychiatric injury as the consequence of an assault if there is properly qualified evidence that it has occurred.’ and
‘In the case of Attia, the Court of Appeal discussed where the borderline should be drawn between, on the one hand, the emotions of distress and grief and on the other hand some actual psychiatric illness such as anxiety, neurosis or a reactive depression. The authorities recognised that there is a line to be drawn and whether any given case falls on one side or the other is a matter for expert evidence. The civil cases are also concerned with the broader question of the boundaries of the law of negligence and the duty of care, which do not concern us.
Accordingly, the phrase ‘actual bodily harm’ is capable of including psychiatric injury. But it does not include mere emotion such as fear, distress or panic, nor does it include, as such, states of mind that are not themselves evidence of some identifiable clinical condition. The phrase ‘state of mind’ is not a scientific one and should be avoided in considering whether or not the psychiatric injury has been caused; its use is likely to create in the minds of the jury the impression that something which is no more than a strong emotion, such as extreme fear or panic, can amount to actual bodily harm. It cannot. Similarly, juries should not be directed that an assault which causes a hysterical and nervous condition is an assault occasioning actual bodily harm. Where there is evidence that the assault has caused some psychiatric injury, the jury should be directed that injury is capable of amounting to actual bodily harm; otherwise there should be no reference to the mental state of the victim following the assault unless it be relevant to some other aspect of the case, as it was in Roberts’.
Hobhouse J
Times 19-Nov-1993, Ind Summary 15-Nov-1993, [1994] 99 Cr App R 147
Offences Against the Person Act 1861 47
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – 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 . .
Approved – Regina v Burstow, Regina v Ireland HL 24-Jul-1997
The defendant was accused of assault occasioning actual bodily harm when he had made silent phone calls which were taken as threatening.
Held: An assault might consist of the making of a silent telephone call in circumstances where it causes . .
Cited – Regina v Ireland CACD 14-May-1996
Silent telephone calls which resulted in psychiatric damage to the victim could constitute an ‘assault occasioning actual bodily harm’ for the purposes of section 47 of the 1861 Act. Swinton Thomas LJ said: ‘The early cases pre-date the invention of . .
Cited – Regina v Burstow Admn 29-Jul-1996
Grievous bodily harm can be inflicted by a stalker without direct physical contact and can include psychological damage. The statute could be interpreted to reflect current standards. . .
Cited – Regina v Morris CACD 22-Oct-1997
An allegation of assault occasioning bodily harm, where the harm alleged was of a purely psychological nature, must be supported by psychiatric evidence. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 24 August 2021; Ref: scu.86328

Tommaso Palumbo v Italy: ECHR 26 Apr 2001

Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses award – Convention proceedings
On 1 April 1992, the applicant, charged with sale of drugs (detenzione di sostanze stupefacienti a fine di spaccio), was arrested in Benevento but then released. After many adjournments, in a judgment of 9 February 1998, he was acquitted. This decision became final on 27 March 1998. He complained that he had not been given a timely trial. According to the applicant, the overall duration of the proceedings is in breach of the ‘reasonable time’ requirement laid down in Article 6 ss 1 of the Convention. The Government rejected this allegation, on the ground that several hearings were postponed either by reason of lawyers’ strikes, or because of the political elections, or finally because of the absence of some witnesses. They furthermore relied on the excessive workload of the Benevento District Court.
Held: A delay in the criminal proceedings caused by a lawyers’ strike cannot be attributed to the State, whereas the period of time elapsed between the end of the strike and the new hearing is to be imputed to the conduct of the authorities. Having regard to the conduct of the authorities dealing with the case, the Court considered that an overall length of five years, eleven months and twenty-six days for one degree of jurisdiction is excessive. There has accordingly been a violation of Article 6 ss 1 of the Convention.
CL Rozakis, President, B. Conforti, G. Bonello, V. Straznicka, P. Lorenzen, M. Fischbach, M. Tsatsa-Nikolovska
45264/99, [2001] ECHR 321
Worldlii, Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights 6.1
Human Rights
Cited by:
Cited – Pulcini v Italy ECHR 17-Apr-2003
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of P1-1 ; Violation of Art. 6-1 ; Pecuniary damage – financial award ; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award
The applicant complained of undue delay . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 24 August 2021; Ref: scu.166096

Camilleri v Malta: ECHR 22 Jan 2013

ECHR Article 7-1
Nulla poena sine lege
Power of public prosecutor to decide in which court to try a person accused of drug-trafficking, and therefore the range of sentence: violation
Facts – In 2003 the applicant was charged with possession of illegal drugs not intended for his exclusive use. The relevant domestic law provided two different ranges of sentence for that offence, namely four years to life imprisonment on conviction by the Criminal Court, or six months to ten years on conviction by the Court of Magistrates. Under domestic law, it was the public prosecutor who decided in which court the accused would be tried. The applicant was tried in the Criminal Court and sentenced to fifteen years’ imprisonment and a EUR 35,000 fine. The judgment was upheld on appeal. In 2009 the applicant sought constitutional redress on the grounds that the public prosecutor’s power to decide the trial court violated the impartiality requirement. In dismissing that complaint, the Constitutional Court held that that power could not be equated with the powers of a judge, as the public prosecutor had no control over the finding of guilt. Nevertheless it considered that it would be desirable, for the sake of fairness and transparency, to establish criteria to assist public prosecutors in the choice of appropriate forum.
Law – Article 7: While it was clear that the sentence imposed on the applicant had been established by law and had not exceeded the statutory limits, the law did not make it possible for him to know, before the decision of the public prosecutor determining the court where he was to be tried, which of the two ranges of sentence would apply to him. The domestic case-law seemed to indicate that such decisions were at times unpredictable. The applicant would not have been able to know the punishment applicable to him even if he had obtained legal advice on the matter, as the decision was solely dependent on the prosecutor’s discretion to determine the trial court. The criteria to be applied by the prosecutor when taking his decision were not specified in any legislative text and had not been clarified by the courts. The law did not provide any guidance on what would amount to a more serious offence or a less serious one. The lack of such guidelines had also been noted by the Constitutional Court. Thus, the law did not determine with any degree of precision the circumstances in which a particular range of sentence applied. The prosecutor had in effect an unfettered discretion to decide which minimum penalty would be applicable with respect to the same offence. His decision was inevitably subjective and left room for arbitrariness, particularly given the lack of procedural safeguards. The domestic courts were bound by that decision and could not impose a sentence below the minimum established by law despite any concerns they might have as to the use of the prosecutor’s discretion. The relevant legal provision had therefore failed to satisfy the foreseeability requirement and provide effective safeguards against arbitrary punishment.
Conclusion: violation (by six votes to one).
Article 41: EUR 1,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage.
42931/10 – HEJUD, [2013] ECHR 83, 42931/10 – Legal Summary, [2013] ECHR 281, (2013) 57 EHRR 32
Bailii, Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights
Human Rights

Updated: 24 August 2021; Ref: scu.472436

Regina v Khan: CACD 7 Apr 2008

The court considered responsibility where the defendant had supplied a drug to the victim who had died from the drug. In this case the victim was a fifteen year old prostitute coming to use heroin for the first time. It was not clear that she could have been capable of genuine consent to the consequences.
Times 07-Apr-2008, [1998] Crim LR 830
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Kane v HM Advocate; MacAngus v HM Advocate HCJ 27-Jan-2009
The defendants appealed against convictions for culpable homicide. In each case they had supplied a drug to the victim who had then self-administered the drug and died as a consequence.
Held: The appeals failed. The court considered whether . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 22 August 2021; Ref: scu.332843

Cambridgeshire County Council v Kama: Admn 21 Nov 2006

[2006] EWHC 3148 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Ferguson v British Gas Trading Ltd CA 10-Feb-2009
Harassment to Criminal Level needed to Convict
The claimant had been a customer of the defendant, but had moved to another supplier. She was then subjected to a constant stream of threatening letters which she could not stop despite re-assurances and complaints. The defendant now appealed . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 22 August 2021; Ref: scu.247336

Narine Sooklal and Francis Mansingh v The State: PC 21 Jul 1999

PC Trinidad and Tobago
Appeal No 40 of 1998, [1999] UKPC 37, [1999] 1 WLR 2011
Bailii, PC, PC, PC
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Michael Pringle v The Queen PC 27-Jan-2003
PC (Jamaica) The court considered the way in which statistical conclusions drawn from DNA evidence had been presented to the jury. The judge had fallen into the ‘Prosecutor’s Fallacy.’ Also the court had relied . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 22 August 2021; Ref: scu.163193

Williams v Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 1992

The defendant’s conviction for possessing a bladed article in a public place was quashed on the ground that the landing of a block of residential flats where the appellant had been drunk and disorderly, and to which access was restricted to residents and their lawful visitors, was not a public place.
[1992] 95 Cr App R 415
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Harriot v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 4-May-2005
The defendant appealed by case stated against his conviction under the 1988 Act of possessing a bladed article in a public place. He had been found in the forecourt of a hostel by the police seeking to re-enter after being excluded. He said that it . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 August 2021; Ref: scu.512351

AP v Secretary Of State for the Home Department: CA 15 Jul 2009

Carnwath, Wall, Maurice Kay LJJ
[2009] EWCA Civ 731
Bailii
Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005, European Convention on Human Rights 8
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Secretary of State for the Home Department v AP Admn 12-Aug-2008
The court reviewed the need for the control order made against AP. . .

Cited by:
Appeal from – Secretary of State for The Home Department v AP SC 16-Jun-2010
The claimant challenged the terms of the control order made against him under the 2005 Act saying that it was too restrictive. Though his family was in London, the control order confined him to a house many miles away for 16 hours a day.
Held: . .
See Also – Secretary of State for The Home Department v AP (No. 2) SC 23-Jun-2010
The claimant had object to a Control order made against him and against a decision that he be deported. He had been protected by an anonymity order, but the Court now considered whether it should be continued.
Held: AP had already by the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 August 2021; Ref: scu.347737

Bowman, Regina v: CACD 2 Mar 2006

The defendant appealed his conviction of murder saying that evidence of other pathologists undermined the evidence given by similar experts for the crown.
Held: The court took the opportunity to give guidance on the provision of expert evidence to criminal trials. There had been several expert pathologists, some of whom were available to give evidence at trial but had not been called. They did not undermine the evidence given by the principal crown pathology expert: ‘this appeal is in reality an attempt to re-open all the arguments deployed at trial. We are not to be taken as saying that in all cases where fresh expert evidence is called to the same effect as was called at trial an appeal can never succeed. But in our judgment this court will be astute to ensure that in such appeals the trial process is not thereby subverted. ‘ The court set out several additional necessary inclusions in an expert’s report: ‘1. Details of the expert’s academic and professional qualifications, experience and accreditation relevant to the opinions expressed in the report and the range and extent of the expertise and any limitations upon the expertise.
2. A statement setting out the substance of all the instructions received (with written or oral), questions upon which an opinion is sought, the materials provided and considered, and the documents, statements, evidence, information or assumptions which are material to the opinions expressed or upon which those opinions are based.
3. Information relating to who has carried out measurements, examinations, tests etc and the methodology used, and whether or not such measurements etc were carried out under the expert’s supervision.
4. Where there is a range of opinion in the matters dealt with in the report a summary of the range of opinion and the reasons for the opinion given. In this connection any material facts or matters which detract from the expert’s opinions and any points which should fairly be made against any opinions expressed should be set out.
5. Relevant extracts of literature or any other material which might assist the court.
6. A statement to the effect that the expert has complied with his/her duty to the court to provide independent assistance by way of objective unbiased opinion in relation to matters within his or her expertise and an acknowledgment that the expert will inform all parties and where appropriate the court in the event that his/her opinion changes on any material issues.
7. Where on an exchange of experts’ reports matters arise which require a further or supplemental report the above guidelines should, of course, be complied with.’
[2006] EWCA Crim 417, Times 24-Mar-2006
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Kai-Whitewind, Regina v CACD 3-May-2005
The defendant was convicted of infanticide and murder. The experts differed as to the cause of death. She appealed her conviction saying that the experts in effect cancelled each other out.
Held: Her appeal failed. The jury was entitled to . .
Cited – Regina v Jones (Steven Martin) CACD 23-Jul-1996
The defendant appealed his conviction for murder wishing to bring in evidence of his diminished responsibility at the time of the offence.
Held: The evidence was admitted, but the conviction was upheld. The court took the opportunity to give . .
Cited – National Justice Compania Naviera S A v Prudential Assurance Company Ltd (‘The Ikarian Reefer’) 1993
Cresswell J spoke of the nature of the duty owed by expert witnesses: ‘The duties and responsibilities of expert witnesses in civil cases include the following:

1. Expert evidence presented to the Court should be, and should be seen to be, the . .
Cited – Regina v Pendleton HL 13-Dec-2001
The defendant had appealed his conviction for murder to the Court of Appeal. The 1968 Act required the court to consider whether the conviction was unsafe. New evidence was before the Court of Appeal, but they had rejected the appeal.
Held: . .
Cited – Regina v Harris, Rockalan, Cherry, Faulder CACD 21-Jul-2005
The court gave guidance in respect of expert evidence given in criminal trials. The court made the following two points with regard to evidence of a subdural hematoma caused non-accidentally. First, a clinically observed coincidence of SDH, retinal . .
Cited – Kelvin Dial (otherwise called Peter), Andrew Dottin (otherwise called Maxwell) v The State PC 14-Feb-2005
(Trinidad and Tobago) Two defendants appealed against their convictions for murder. The principal witness who had identified them, had retracted his evidence, but the retraction had not been believed. He was then shown to have lied.
Held: The . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 20 August 2021; Ref: scu.239056

Regina v Burgess: 1991

[1991] 93 Crim App R 41
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Roach CACD 4-Dec-2001
The defendant appealed a conviction for unlawful wounding, claiming a defence of automatism. Witnesses described his behaviour during the incident in ways which suggested this not to be the case. Medical evidence suggested he was capable of acting . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 20 August 2021; Ref: scu.183191

Molloy v BPHA Limited: CA 9 Jul 2021

A engages in racist harassment of his neighbour B and her family. B complains to the police and to her housing association, which is landlord of both properties. She is advised to install CCTV outside the front of the property to obtain evidence. She does so, gathers evidence, and the court makes injunctions against A and his wife. A’s continued racist abuse is recorded by the CCTV and viewed by B later. The housing association takes committal proceedings for breach of the order. The judge makes a finding of fact that a breach had occurred and imposes a suspended sentence of imprisonment. A appeals on the basis that the judge was wrong to make the finding, and that the terms on which the sentence was suspended, which include an order preventing him from using any abusive language or gestures outside the properties, disproportionately breach his right to respect for his private life.
Held: Dismissed
Lord Justice Peter Jackson
[2021] EWCA Civ 1035
Bailii, Judiciary
Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 1 2
England and Wales

Updated: 16 August 2021; Ref: scu.664389

Blaikie v British Transport Commission: 1961

The court said that it was necessary for the law to come to a compromise with the doctrine of causation; expediency and good sense dictated that for practical purposes a line had to be drawn somewhere and, in doing so, the court was to be guided by the practical experience of the reasonable man rather than by the theoretical speculations of the philosopher.
Lord Justice-Clerk Thomson
1961 SC 44
Scotland
Cited by:
Cited – Kane v HM Advocate; MacAngus v HM Advocate HCJ 27-Jan-2009
The defendants appealed against convictions for culpable homicide. In each case they had supplied a drug to the victim who had then self-administered the drug and died as a consequence.
Held: The appeals failed. The court considered whether . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 August 2021; Ref: scu.332842

Liyanage v The Queen: PC 1967

(Ceylon) The appellants had been convicted of grave criminal offences under laws of the Parliament of Ceylon. The Act under which they were convicted was passed after an abortive coup, and deprived the appellants retrospectively of their right to trial by jury providing for their trial by three judges appointed by the Minister, imposed a minimum sentence of ten years, and provided for forfeiture of their property.
Held: The convictions were quashed by the Privy Council on the footing that the laws offended against Ceylon’s written constitution. It offended fundamental principles which had been inherited into the Ceylon constitutional framework. The Ceylon (Constitution) Order in Council, which contained the phrase ‘laws for peace, order and good government’ coupled with the Ceylon Independence Act were intended to and did give the full legislative powers of a sovereign independent state. The Independence Act provided for certain limits on UK legislation which had previously been enacted and for the removal of a bar to enactments repugnant to UK laws.
‘Therefore the legislative power of Ceylon is still limited by the inability (which it inherits from the Crown) to pass laws which offend against fundamental principles. This vague and uncertain phrase might arguably be called in aid against some of the statutes passed by any Sovereign power. And it would be regrettable if the procedure adopted in giving independence to Ceylon has produced the situation for which the appellants contend.
In view of their Lordships, however, such a contention is not maintainable. Before the passing of the Colonial Laws Validity Act, 1865, considerable difficulties had been caused by the over-insistence of a Colonial judge in South Australia that colonial legislative Acts must not be repugnant to English law (‘The Statute of Westminster and Dominion Status’ by K. C. Wheare [the 4th edn, pp, 75, 76, 77 are referred to in a footnote to the report. Sir Kenneth Wheare was a distinguished Rector of Exeter College Oxford] ). That Act was intended to and did overcome the difficulties. It provided that colonial laws should be void to the extent in which they were repugnant to an Act of the United Kingdom parliament applicable to that colony, ‘but not otherwise’ (s.2) and that they should not be void or inoperative on the ground of repugnancy to the law of England (s.3).
‘The essential feature of this measure is that it abolished once and for all the vague doctrine of repugnancy to the principles of English law as a source of invalidity of any colonial Act… The boon thus secured was enormous; it was now necessary only for the colonial legislator to ascertain that there was no Imperial Act applicable and his field of action and choice of means became unfettered.’ (‘The Sovereignty of the British Dominions’ by Prof. Keith [the footnote refers to an edition of 1929, p. 45] )
Their Lordships cannot accept the view that the legislature while removing the fetter of repugnancy to English law, left in existence a fetter of repugnancy to some vague unspecified law of natural justice. The terms of the Colonial Laws Validity Act and especially the words ‘but not otherwise’ in section 2 make it clear that Parliament was intending to deal with the whole question of repugnancy. Moreover their Lordships doubt whether Lord Mansfield was intending to say that what was not repugnant to English law might yet be repugnant to fundamental principles or to set up the latter as a different test from the former. Whatever may have been the possible arguments in this matter prior to the passing of the Colonial Laws Validity Act, they are not maintainable at the present date.’
Lord Pierse: ‘Blackstone in his Commentaries said: ‘Therefore a particular act of the legislature to confiscate the goods of Titius , or to attaint him of high treason, does not enter into the idea of a municipal law: for the operation of this act is spent upon Titius only and has no relation to the community in general: it is rather a sentence than a law.’
If such Acts as these were valid the judicial power could be wholly absorbed by the legislature and taken out of the hands of the judges. It is appreciated that the legislature had no such general intention. It was beset by a grave situation and it took grave measures to deal with it, thinking, one must presume, that it had power to do so and was acting rightly. But that consideration is irrelevant, and gives no validity to acts which infringe the Constitution. What is done once, if it be allowed, may be done again and in a lesser crisis and less serious circumstances. And thus judicial power may be eroded. Such an erosion is contrary to the clear intention of the Constitution. In their Lordships’ view the Acts were ultra vires and invalid.’
Lord Pierse
[1967] 1 AC 259
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Campbell v Hall 1774
The appellant argued that, since the Crown had had no power to make laws for the colony of Ceylon which offended against fundamental principles, at independence it could not hand over to Ceylon a higher power than it possessed itself.
Held: . .

Cited by:
Cited – Chagos Islanders v The Attorney General, Her Majesty’s British Indian Ocean Territory Commissioner QBD 9-Oct-2003
The Chagos Islands had been a British dependent territory since 1814. The British government repatriated the islanders in the 1960s, and the Ilois now sought damages for their wrongful displacement, misfeasance, deceit, negligence and to establish a . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Another, ex parte Bancoult Admn 3-Nov-2000
The applicant sought judicial review of an ordinance made by the commissioner for the British Indian Ocean Territory. An issue was raised whether the High Court in London had jurisdiction to entertain the proceedings and grant relief.
Held: . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 August 2021; Ref: scu.186648

Mulcahy v Regina: HL 1868

When two or more agree to carry a criminal scheme into effect, the very plot is the criminal act itself, the conspiracy.
(1868) LR HL 306
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Hobbs, Hobbs, Hobbs, Charge CACD 14-Feb-2002
The defendants appealed sentences of 7.5 and 3 years for conspiracy to facilitate illegal immigration. They had hired lorries with a view to bringing people in It was submitted that the sentences were outside the powers under the Act. The sentence . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 August 2021; Ref: scu.180949

Lauko v Slovakia: ECHR 2 Sep 1998

The applicant was fined under the domestic Minor Offences Act for accusing his neighbours, without justification, of causing a nuisance. The government relied on the modesty of the punishment capable of being imposed and the fact that the offence did not give rise to a criminal record as distinguishing it from offences within the criminal law.
Held: The general character of the legal provision infringed by the applicant together with the deterrent and punitive purpose of the penalty imposed on him, were sufficient to show that the offence in question was, in terms of Article 6 of the Convention, criminal in nature. The three criteria were not cumulative and that it sufficed that the offence in question should, by its nature, be criminal from the point of view of the Convention, or should have made the person concerned liable to a sanction which, by its nature and degree of severity, belonged in general to the criminal sphere. At the same time a cumulative approach could be adopted where the separate analysis of each criterion did not make it possible to reach a clear conclusion as to the existence of a criminal charge.
26138/95, (2001) 33 EHRR 40, [1998] ECHR 82
Worldlii, Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights 6
Human Rights
Cited by:
Cited – Gora and others v Commissioners of Customs and Excise and others CA 11-Apr-2003
gora_custCA2003
The appellants challenged decisions of the VAT and Duties Tribunal after seizure of their goods, and in particular whether the cases had been criminal or civil cases and following Roth, whether the respondent’s policy had been lawful and . .
Cited – Regina v Parole Board ex parte Smith, Regina v Parole Board ex parte West (Conjoined Appeals) HL 27-Jan-2005
Each defendant challenged the way he had been treated on revocation of his parole licence, saying he should have been given the opportunity to make oral representations.
Held: The prisoners’ appeals were allowed.
Lord Bingham stated: . .
Cited – Regina (McCann and Others) v Manchester Crown Court CA 9-Mar-2001
Proceedings applying for an anti-social behaviour order, were properly civil proceedings, with civil standards of evidence, and the Human Rights Act provisions relating to criminal proceedings, were not applicable either. The section included acts . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 August 2021; Ref: scu.165651

In Re K (Deceased): CA 1986

The wife who had been subjected to years of abuse shot her violent husband dead in the course of an argument, when a loaded shotgun she had picked up and pointed at him as a threat to deter him from offering her further violence went off accidentally.
Held: The appeal against an order for relief failed. The 1982 Act could be used in this case to releive the wife of the severe consequences of the forfeiture rule.
[1985] Fam Law 19, [1986] Ch 180, [1985] 2 All ER 833, [1985] 3 WLR 234
Forfeiture Act 1982 2
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Mack v Lockwood and Others ChD 19-Jun-2009
The claimant had been convicted of the manslaughter of his wife. He now applied for relief agsinst forfeiture of his share of her estate. He was elderly and had suffered some mental impairment after a stroke, which might have led him to misjudge his . .
Cited – D v L and Others ChD 16-Apr-2003
The claimant had been found guilty of the manslaughter by diminished responsibility of the deceased. He now sought disapplication of the 1982 Act.
Held: The application failed: ‘The reforms introduced by the Homicide Act 1957 were designed to . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 August 2021; Ref: scu.428470

Parveaz, Regina v: CACD 19 May 2017

Point on the operation of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 with regard to the application of the assumptions arising under section 10 in the context of the criminal lifestyle provisions.
[2017] EWCA Crim 873
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 12 August 2021; Ref: scu.666476

Regina v T: CACD 16 Apr 2008

The twelve year old defendant had pleaded guilty to several allegations of sexual assault. The judge had ruled that it was not open to him to plead doli incapax. He appealed saying that only the presumption of doli incapax had been abolished, and not the idea itself.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. When Parliament abolished the presumption of doli incapax, at the same time it abolished the idea of it: ‘Parliament must be taken to have intended ‘the presumption’ to encompass the concept of doli incapax when it was abolished in section 34. That, appears to us to have been the common understanding of the words at the time that the Act was passed.’
Latham LJ VP, Forbes J, Sir Richard Curtis
[2008] EWCA Crim 815, Times 05-May-2008, [2008] Crim LR 721, [2008] 3 WLR 923, [2008] 2 Cr App R 17, (2008) 172 JP 335
Bailii
Crime and Disorder Act 1998 34, Children and Young Persons Act 1933 50
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Crown Prosecution Service v P; Director of Public Prosecutions v P Admn 27-Apr-2007
The prosecutor appealed a grant of a stay of a prosecution of the 13 year old defendant as an abuse of process. Reports had indicated that he was unfit to plead. The prosecution contended that, if the court thought P ought not to face trial by . .
Cited – C (A Minor) v Director of Public Prosecutions QBD 30-Mar-1994
The 12 year old defendant held the handlebars of a motorcycle allowing a second boy to try to remove the chain and padlock securing it. He appealed against his conviction.
Held: The presumption of doli incapax for a 10-14 year old child is no . .
Cited – JBH and JH (minors) v O’Connell QBD 1981
The defendants were boys of 13 and 11. They broke into a school, stole various items and ‘used 12 tubes of duplicating ink to redecorate the school’. They offered no evidence and submitted that there was no case to answer as the prosecution had not . .
Cited – A v Director of Public Prosecutions QBD 1992
The defendant, aged 11, appealed against his conviction of an offence under the Public Order Act 1986, on evidence that he had thrown bricks at a police vehicle. He had then fled the scene.
Held: The conviction was quashed. The fact that the . .

Cited by:
Appeal from – JTB, Regina v HL 29-Apr-2009
The defendant appealed against his convictions for sexual assaults. He was aged twelve at the time of the offences, but had been prevented from arguing that he had not known that what he was doing was wrong. The House was asked whether the effect of . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 11 August 2021; Ref: scu.267059

Ibrahim and Others, Regina v: CACD 23 Apr 2008

The defendants sought leave to appeal against their convictions for conspiracy to murder after involvement in a plot to explode several bombs on the London Transport system. They said that it had not been their intention to explode the devices.
Held: Leave was refused. The defences were ludicrous, though in fact the devices were not viable. Evidence which was obtained during safety interviews (initial interviews by the police intended to ensure the safety of the public) was admissible provided it to not make a fair trial impossible. In this case those interviews had been undertaken under caution. It was purely a matter for the police whether they did this or chose to offer undertakings not to use any information for prosecution purposes. The judge had taken great care in analysing the submissions and agreed directions to the jury with counsel.
Sir Igor Judge P, Forbes J, Mackay J
[2008] EWCA Crim 880, Times 08-May-2008, [2008] 2 Cr App R 23, [2008] 2 Cr App Rep 23, [2009] Crim LR 110, [2009] 1 WLR 578, [2008] 4 All ER 208
Bailii
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 74 78, Terrorism Act 2000 Sch 8
England and Wales

Updated: 10 August 2021; Ref: scu.267058

Mackinlay and Others, Regina v: SC 25 Jul 2018

A trial had not yet been begun, but the court was now asked a point of pure statutory construction relating to the manner in which election expenses are required to be calculated and declared. The defendants face charges of knowingly making false declarations in relation to election expenses, or aiding and abetting or encouraging or assisting such offences. The parties asked the judge to determine the point on a preparatory hearing and the CACD certified the question: ‘Do property, goods, services or facilities transferred to or provided for the use or benefit of a candidate free of charge or at a discount (as identified in section 90C(1)(a) of the Representation of the People Act 1983 (as amended)) only fall to be declared as election expenses if they have been authorised by the candidate, his election agent or someone authorised by either or both of them?’
Held: No. The appeal was allowed.
The test for the operation of section 90C is the threefold one: ‘ Section 90C asks, by subsections (1)(a) and (b), three questions about the expenditure it is considering. If those questions are answered ‘yes’, then by subsection (2) it stipulates that the expenditure shall be ‘treated . . as incurred by the candidate’ for the purposes of the Act. That is a deeming provision. If the conditions are satisfied, the notional expenditure becomes by statute the same as if it had been actually incurred by the candidate, even though it has not actually been incurred by him. The three questions can be simplified for present purposes by expressing them in terms of services, but of course the same applies to goods, property or facilities. The questions posed by subsections (1)(a) and (b) are:
1. Were the services provided for the use or benefit of the candidate either free of charge or at a discount of more than 10% of commercial value? (subsection (1)(a))
2. Were they made use of by or on behalf of the candidate? (subsection (1)(b)) and
3. If the services had actually been paid for (expenses actually incurred) by or on behalf of the candidate, would those expenses be election expenses incurred by or on his behalf (and thus subject to the various controls imposed by the Act)? (also subsection (1)(b)).’
Lady Hale, President, Lord Mance, Lord Hughes, Lord Hodge, Lord Lloyd-Jones
[2018] UKSC 42, UKSC 2018/0091
Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary, SC Summary Video, SC 2018 May 28 am Video, SC 2018 May 28 pm Video
Representation of the People Act 1983, Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000
England and Wales
Citing:
At CACD – Mackinlay and Others, Regina v CACD 1-Apr-2018
. .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 August 2021; Ref: scu.620136

Mackinlay and Others, Regina v: CACD 1 Apr 2018

[2018] EWCA Crim 724
Representation of the People Act 1983, Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000
England and Wales
Cited by:
At CACD – Mackinlay and Others, Regina v SC 25-Jul-2018
A trial had not yet been begun, but the court was now asked a point of pure statutory construction relating to the manner in which election expenses are required to be calculated and declared. The defendants face charges of knowingly making false . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 August 2021; Ref: scu.666496

Regina v Keyn: 13 Nov 1876

The court considered the significance of the existence of an academic consensus as to the meaning of an international convention. Cockburn CJ said: ‘even if entire unanimity had existed in respect of the important particulars to which I have referred, in place of so much discrepancy of opinion, the question would still remain, how far the law as stated by the publicists had received the assent of the civilized nations of the world. For writers on international law, however valuable their labours may be in elucidating and ascertaining the principles and rules of law, cannot make the law. To be binding, the law must have received the assent of the nations who are to be bound by it. This assent may be express, as by treaty or the acknowledged concurrence of governments, or may be implied from established usage . . ‘ and
‘Nor, in my opinion, would the clearest proof of unanimous assent on the part of other nations be sufficient to authorize the tribunals of this country to apply, without an Act of Parliament, what would practically amount to a new law. In so doing we should be unjustifiably usurping the province of the legislature. The assent of nations is doubtless sufficient to give the power of parliamentary legislation in a matter otherwise within the sphere of international law; but it would be powerless to confer without such legislation a jurisdiction beyond and unknown to the law, such as that now insisted on, a jurisdiction over foreigners in foreign ships on a portion of the high seas.’
The prisoner was indicted at the Central Criminal Court for manslaughter. He was a foreigner and in command of a foreign ship, passing within three miles of the shore of England on a voyage to a foreign port; and whilst within that distance his ship ran into a British ship and sank her, whereby a passenger on board the latter ship was drowned. The facts of the case were such as to amount to manslaughter by English law.
Held: By the majority of the Court (Cockburn, C.J., Kelly, C.B., Bramwell, J.A., Lush and Field, JJ., Sir R. Phiilimore, and Pollock, B.; Lord Coleridge, CJ, Brett and Amphlett, JJ.A., Grove, Denman, and Lindley, JJ., dissenting), that the Central Criminal Court had no jurisdiction to try the prisoner for the offence charged.
By the whole of the majority of the Court, on the ground that, prior to 28 Hen. 8, c. 15, the admiral had no jurisdiction to try offences by foreigners on board foreign ships, whether within or without the limit of three miles from the shore of England; that that and the subsequent statutes only transferred to the Common Law Courts and the Central Criminal Court the jurisdiction formerly possessed by the admiral; and that, therefore, in the absence of statutory enactment, the Central Criminal Court had no power to try such an offence.
By Kelly, C.B., and Sir R. Phiilimore, also, on the ground that, by the principles of international law, the power of a nation over the sea within three miles of its coasts is only for certain limited purposes; and that Parliament could not, consistently with those principles, apply English criminal law within those limits.
Held, contra, by Lord Coleridge, C.J., Brett and Amphlett, JJ.A., Grove, Denman, and Lindley, JJ., on the ground that the sea within three miles of the coast of England is part of the territory of England; that the English criminal law extends over those limits; and the admiral formerly had, and the Central Criminal Court now has, jurisdiction to try offences there committed although on board foreign ships.
By Lord Coleridge, C.J., and Denman, J., on the ground that the prisoner’s ship having run into a British ship and sank it, and so caused the death of a passenger on board the latter ship, the offence was committed on board a British ship, and, therefore, the Central Criminal Court had jurisdiction.
Cockburn CJ
(1876) 2 Ex D 63, (1876-1877) 2 ExD 63, [1876] UKLawRpExch 73, [1876] UKLawRpExch 73, (1876-1877) 2 ExD 63
Cmmonlii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Immigration Officer at Prague Airport and another, ex parte European Roma Rights Centre and others HL 9-Dec-2004
Extension oh Human Rights Beyond Borders
The appellants complained that the system set up by the respondent where Home Office officers were placed in Prague airport to pre-vet applicants for asylum from Romania were dsicriminatory in that substantially more gypsies were refused entry than . .
Cited – Regina v Jones (Margaret), Regina v Milling and others HL 29-Mar-2006
Domestic Offence requires Domestic Defence
Each defendant sought to raise by way of defence of their otherwise criminal actions, the fact that they were attempting to prevent the commission by the government of the crime of waging an aggressive war in Iraq, and that their acts were . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 07 August 2021; Ref: scu.220674

Noye, Regina v: CACD 10 Oct 2001

[2001] EWCA Crim 2229
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
First Appeal – Noye, Kenneth, Regina v CACD 22-Mar-2011
noye_rCACD0311
The prisoner appealed against his conviction for murder on reference from the CCRC. There were new doubts about the reliabiity of the expert forensic expert.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. Dr H’s evidence did not impinge on the essential . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 05 August 2021; Ref: scu.424974

Popat, Regina v: CACD 28 Jul 2008

The defendant appealed against his conviction for contempt of court. He had failed to appear as a witness in answer to his summons.
Held: The better practice where it appeared that a witness would in fact attend voluntarily was for the court to direct officers not to execute the warrant unless necessary. The former practice of directing that it be executed only at the court should be discontinued. A court could also back the warrant for bail.
Lord Justice Hughes, Mrs Justice Dobbs and Judge Pert, QC
[2008] EWCA Crim 1921
Bailii, Times
Administration of Justice Act 1960 13
England and Wales

Updated: 05 August 2021; Ref: scu.273126

Regina v Malcherek and Steel: CACD 1981

The defendants appealed against their convictions for murder. They had severely assaulted the victim who later in hospital had ventilator support withdrawn. They asserted that the proximate cause of the death was that act, not theirs.
Held: The appeals failed. The act or omission of a defendant need not be a substantial cause of a criminal result such as death in order to render the defendant guilty of murder. The Court drew the distinction between the ultimate cause of death and what it described as the continuing and operative cause.
The Judge referred to an allegation made by the defendant, if true, as amounting to ‘a most shocking and cynical conspiracy against [the defendant], a dreadful thing’ the allegation being one of extracting a false confession from the defendant. Lord Lane observed: ‘it seems to us that the judge was at the very least entitled to point out to the jury, in clear terms without fudging the issue, the suggestion which was being made against the police; namely that it was a cold, cynical conspiracy to convict an innocent man of murder . . he certainly cannot be criticised for telling the jury in plain terms, without blurring the edges, what it was precisely that the defence was suggesting the police had done.’
Lord Lane CJ
[1981] 1 WLR 690, [1981] 2 All ER 422, CA, (1981) 73 Cr App R 173
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Airedale NHS Trust v Bland HL 4-Feb-1993
Procedures on Withdrawal of Life Support Treatment
The patient had been severely injured in the Hillsborough disaster, and had come to be in a persistent vegetative state (PVS). The doctors sought permission to withdraw medical treatment. The Official Solicitor appealed against an order of the Court . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 05 August 2021; Ref: scu.180376

Regina v Blaue: CACD 1975

The accused stabbed a Jehovah’s witness who subsequently refused a blood transfusion and died.
Held: The rule that the accused took his victim as he found her applied not only to physical characteristics, but also to her beliefs.
[1975] 1 WLR 1411, [1975] 3 All ER 446
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Airedale NHS Trust v Bland HL 4-Feb-1993
Procedures on Withdrawal of Life Support Treatment
The patient had been severely injured in the Hillsborough disaster, and had come to be in a persistent vegetative state (PVS). The doctors sought permission to withdraw medical treatment. The Official Solicitor appealed against an order of the Court . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 05 August 2021; Ref: scu.180373

Regina v Goodfellow: CACD 1986

The defendant had failed to get re-housed. He planned to burn down his present lodgings, rescuing the other inhabitants. Three died in his attempt. He appealed a conviction for manslaughter.
Held: The case was either an unlawful act or Lawrence type case. The appeal failed. In manslaughter by an unlawful act, the jury should be directed that where he did an unlawful act which sober people would see to be dangerous, and death resulted, he would be guilty of manslaughter. In a Lawrence type case, the jury should be directed of the need for him to have foreseen the possibility of injury.
[1986] 83 Cr App Rep 23
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Lawrence (Stephen) HL 1981
The defendant had ridden a motor-cycle and hit a pedestrian. The court asked whether he had been reckless.
Held: The House understood recklessness as ‘a state of mind stopping short of deliberate intention, and going beyond mere inadvertence’ . .
Applied – Regina v Church CCA 1965
The defendant was convicted of manslaughter. After he had been unable to satisfy his female victim sexually, he had become angry and had seriously assaulted her. He mistakenly thought she was dead and tipped her in the river where she drowned.
Applied – Director of Public Prosecutions v Newbury and Jones HL 12-May-1976
The two teenage defendants pushed a stone slab from a bridge onto an oncoming train. The slab went through the window and killed the guard. They appealed convictions for manslaughter.
Held: The appeals were dismissed. An unlawful act can found . .
Explained – Regina v Dalby CACD 1982
Dalby and O’Such were drug addicts. Dalby had obtained 32 tablets of Diconal lawfully. Dalby supplied O’Such with some tablets and probably certain further tablets during the evening. Each injected himself intravenously and they then went out . .
Applied – Kong Cheuk Kwan v The Queen PC 10-Jul-1985
Two hydrofoils collided, causing deaths. The officers were charged with manslaughter.
Held: The Board applied to the situation the law which had developed for road traffic accidents. . .

Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Kennedy CACD 31-Jul-1998
The defendant was convicted of manslaughter having handed a loaded a syringe with heroin and handed it to a friend who injected himself, and later died.
Held: The defendant had gone beyond the minimum necessary for criminal liability. All it . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 05 August 2021; Ref: scu.180394

Regina v Lee: CACD 19 Oct 2000

It was not a requirement on a charge of assault with intent to resist arrest, to establish that the defendant’s believed that the arrest was unlawful. The mens rea required to be established was that the defendant knew he was being arrested. A belief that the arrest was unlawful did not justify resisting the arrest.
Gazette 19-Oct-2000
Offences against the Person Act 1861 38
England and Wales

Updated: 05 August 2021; Ref: scu.87140

O, Regina v: CACD 2 Sep 2008

The defendant agirl in her mid teens, appealed against her conviction for carrying a false identity card.
Held: The appeal was not opposed. The United Kingdom having signed the Convention on Action against People Trafficking was bound to implement its provisions by virtue of article 18 of the Vienna Convention. It is incumbent on those undertaking prosecutions which may be affected by duties under such a convention to apply provisions as necessary. The defendant was herself a victim of trafficking. In this case also the defendant’s lawyers had material which should have been brought to the attention of the court. The circumstances here were shameful.
Lord Justice Laws, Mr Justice Jack and Sir Charles Gray
[2008] EWCA Crim 2835
Bailii, Times
Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (Council of Europe Treaty Series 197, Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties 18
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – LM and Others v Regina; Regina v M(L), B(M) and G(D) CACD 21-Oct-2010
Each defendant appealed saying that being themselves the victims of people trafficking, the prosecutions had failed to take into account its obligations under the Convention.
Held: Prosecutors had ‘a three-stage exercise of judgment. The first . .
Cited – N, Regina v CACD 20-Feb-2012
n_r1CACD2012
The court considered the offence of child trafficking. The defendants had been the victims of such offences and used for managing cannabis production. It was argued that neither defendant should have been prosecuted.
Held: The appeals failed. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 03 August 2021; Ref: scu.278953

Regina v Burdett and Another: CACD 12 Feb 2009

The defendants appealed against their convictions and sentence of three years for money laundering. Dehumidifiers and similar had been sold at grossly inflated prices to the elderly. It was ‘a most despicable fraud committed on the vulnerable people concerned.’ The proceeds had been paid into bank accounts operated by the defendants. There had been no evidence of their knowledge of the fraudulent origin of the funds. They said, in different ways that they were processing cheques issued to others. The prosecution said that they had turned a blind eye to the source of the funds.
Held: The appeals against conviction failed. It had been correct to allow the prosecution to lead the fact that the victims of the fraud had been elderly and vulnerable. It had been material. Though a policeman was on the jury, he was in traffic and from a different force and could have no connection with the people involved. In such cases the court must ask: ‘whether, if the police evidence is challenged, it forms an important part of the prosecution case, and secondly, any possibility of bias that might result from the closeness of the connection between the policeman on the jury and the police officer giving evidence.’
As to the sentences there was no evidence that either defendant knew of the predatory arrangements which generated the funds, and sentences of two years were substituted.
Thomas LJ, Blake, Burnett JJ
[2009] EWCA Crim 543
Bailii
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 328(1), Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 78
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Abdroikof, Regina v Green; Regina v Williamson HL 17-Oct-2007
The House was asked whether a jury in criminal trials containing variously a Crown Prosecution Service solicitor, or a police officer would have the appearance of bias. In Abdroikof, the presence of the police officer on the jury was discovered only . .
Cited – Regina v Khan and Hanif CACD 14-Mar-2008
Each defendant appealed against his conviction saying that the presence on the jury of certain people involved in the law gave the appearance of bias.
Held: The court should be made aware if any potential juror either is or has been a police . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 03 August 2021; Ref: scu.324712

Winters v Regina: CACD 10 Dec 2008

The court was asked to say how it was to be shown that the defendant had profited from drug trafficking.
Held: It was for the prosecution to establish to the civil standard that the defendant had made payments out of the funds alleged to have been received from the drug trafficking. It was insufficient to show that he had made payments in general. The section was explicit.
Lord Justice Hooper, Mr Justice Davis and Dame Heather Steel
[2008] EWCA Crim 2953, Times 12-Jan-2009
Bailii
Drug Trafficking Act 1994 4(3)(b)
England and Wales

Updated: 03 August 2021; Ref: scu.278961

Director of Public Prosecutions v Bussetti: Admn 30 Jul 2021

The defendant took a video of the burning of an effigy of the Grenfell Tower, and distributed it on two small Whats App groups. Others re-distributed it more widely. Mid-trial it was found that another had also filmed the burning and distributed that film, and it was no longer clear that the videos on which the prosecution relied originated with the defendant. Complaint was made of non-disclosure of the second film.
Lord Justice Bean
[2021] EWHC 2140 (Admin)
Bailii
Communications Act 2003 127(1)
England and Wales

Updated: 01 August 2021; Ref: scu.666341

A v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 12 Apr 2017

appeal by way of Case Stated – convicted of three offences of assault by beating, contrary to s.39 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. The assaults were alleged to have been committed during the course of two incidents on (when the Appellant was aged 16) and in relation to each offence the victim was said to be a member of staff at the Children’s Home where the Appellant was then residing.
Mr Justice Sweeney
[2017] EWHC 821 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 31 July 2021; Ref: scu.581814

Pembrokeshire Herald, Re (Leave To Appeal): CACD 27 Jul 2021

A teacher had been tried and acquitted of sexual assaults on girls at his school. The court made an order restricting reporting to disallow identification of anyone involved. The paper now appealed from refusal after the trial to lift the restrictions so as to allow reporting of the evidence given by the defence witnesses, without naming them or publishing their image. It said that it had been criticised for publishing only the prosecution case.
Held: Permission for review refused.
[2021] EWCA Crim 1165
Bailii
Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – ITN News and Others v Regina CACD 21-May-2013
Anonymity benefits maintained
The news services challenged an anonymity order made under section 46 of the 1999 Act in the course of crown court proceedings to protect an adult witness.
Held: The CACD has jurisdiction to hear such an appeal by virtue of section 159 of the . .
Cited – In re S (a Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication) HL 28-Oct-2004
Inherent High Court power may restrain Publicity
The claimant child’s mother was to be tried for the murder of his brother by poisoning with salt. It was feared that the publicity which would normally attend a trial, would be damaging to S, and an application was made for reporting restrictions to . .
Cited – ITN News and Others v Regina CACD 21-May-2013
Anonymity benefits maintained
The news services challenged an anonymity order made under section 46 of the 1999 Act in the course of crown court proceedings to protect an adult witness.
Held: The CACD has jurisdiction to hear such an appeal by virtue of section 159 of the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 31 July 2021; Ref: scu.666231

Sarkandi and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs: Admn 11 Jul 2014

The claimants had wrongly been listed as sanctions breakers, and now challenged the respondent’s refusal to remove them from the related list.
Bean J
[2014] EWHC 2359 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – Sarkandi and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs CA 14-Jul-2015
Appeal from order allowing use of closed material procedures under section 6 of the 2013 Act.
Richards LJ said: ‘The 2013 Act is one of those in which Parliament has stipulated that a closed material procedure may be permitted by the court. It . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 July 2021; Ref: scu.534119

Mohit v The Director of Public Prosecutions of Mauritius: PC 25 Apr 2006

(Mauritius) The board was asked whether the decision of the Director to discontinue a private prosecution was a decision capable of review by the courts under the constitution of Mauritius.
Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Carswell, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood
[2006] UKPC 20, [2006] 1 WLR 3343
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
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 – 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 . .
Cited – Belhaj and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another SC 4-Jul-2018
Challenge to decision not to prosecute senior Intelligence Service officials for alleged offences in connection with his unlawful rendition and mistreatment in Libya. The issue here was whether on the hearing of the application for judicial review, . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 July 2021; Ref: scu.241470

Khaled and Another v The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and Others: Admn 15 Jun 2017

The Claimants were designated by the UN Sanctions Committee in 2007 and 2008 respectively as individuals suspected of being associated with Al-Qaida and the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, and of being involved in terrorism. They sought judicial review of the decisions following that designation.
Jay J
[2017] EWHC 1422 (Admin)
Bailii
Justice and Security Act 2013
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Belhaj and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another SC 4-Jul-2018
Challenge to decision not to prosecute senior Intelligence Service officials for alleged offences in connection with his unlawful rendition and mistreatment in Libya. The issue here was whether on the hearing of the application for judicial review, . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 July 2021; Ref: scu.588884

Regina v Pawlicki; Regina v Swindell: CACD 3 Jun 1992

P had driven to an auctioneer’s showroom, parked outside and locked the car. He left three sawn-off shotguns inside, and went into the auction house and stood a few feet from S. Police officers had been alerted to the possibility of a robbery and arrested them both. P and S were convicted inter alia of having firearms with intent to commit robbery contrary to section 18.
Held: The defendant was properly convicted of having a firearm with intent to rob despite the gun being in a car 50 yards away from the offence. The phrase ‘having with him a firearm’ is to be construed purposely. The section imported an element of propinquity which is not required for mere possession. The emphasis was on the accessibility of the guns to those embarking on committing an indictable offence, rather than on the exact distance between them and the guns.
Gazette 03-Jun-1992, Gazette 26-Aug-1992, [1992] 1 WLR 827
Firearms Act 1968 18(1)
England and Wales

Updated: 29 July 2021; Ref: scu.87533