Category: Crime

Attorney General v X: 5 Mar 1992

(Supreme Court of Ireland) Refusal of abortion following a rape
[1992] IESC 1, [1992] 1 IR 1
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Human Rights Commission for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland : Abortion) SC 7-Jun-2018
The Commission challenged the compatibility of the NI law relating to banning nearly all abortions with Human Rights Law. It now challenged a decision that it did not have standing to bring the case.
Held: (Lady Hale, Lord Kerr and Lord Wilson . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 July 2021; Ref: scu.666175

Regina v Z (Attorney General for Northern Ireland’s Reference): HL 19 May 2005

The defendants appealed their convictions for being members of proscribed organisations. They were members of the ‘Real IRA’, but only the IRA was actually proscribed.
Held: The appeals failed. In construing an Act of Parliament it may be of assistance to have regard to the historical context, which may throw light upon the mischief to which the legislation is directed. There was a long history of attempts to proscribe terrorist organisations. The Act had clearly recognised that such organisations were prone to splinter, and had therefore been careful to ensure that membership of sub-groups of proscribed organisations was also caught.
Lord Carswell, after citing Quintaville, said: ‘My Lords, this appeal serves as a very good example of the principle of statutory construction that in seeking to ascertain the mischief towards which a statute is directed it can be of prime importance to have regard to the historical context . . If the words of a statutory provision, when construed in a literalist fashion, produce a meaning which is manifestly contrary to the intention which one may readily impute to Parliament, when having regard to the historical context and the mischief, then it is not merely legitimate but desirable that they should be construed in the light of the purpose of the legislature in enacting the provision: cf Karpavicius v The Queen [2003] 1 WLR 169, 175-176, paras 15-16, per Lord Steyn.’
Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Woolf, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Carswell, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood
[2005] UKHL 35, Times 20-May-2005, [2000] 2 AC 645, [2005] 3 All ER 95, [2005] 2 WLR 1286
Bailii, House of Lords
Terrorism Act 2000 11
Northern Ireland
Citing:
Appeal from – Regina v Z CANI 30-Jun-2004
. .
Cited – River Wear Commissioners v Adamson HL 1877
It was not necessary for there to be an ambiguity in a statutory provision for a court to be allowed to look at the surrounding circumstances.
As to the Golden Rule of interpretation: ‘It is to be borne in mind that the office of the judge is . .
Cited – Tuck and Sons v Priester 1887
A person should not be penalised except under a clear law: ‘If there is a reasonable interpretation which will avoid the penalty in any particular case, we must adopt that construction. If there are two reasonable constructions we must give the more . .
Cited – Brophy v Attorney-General of Manitoba PC 1895
The purpose of granting to Roman Catholics the right to funding for separate schools and the right to elect trustees to manage their own schools was to enable the teachings of the Roman Catholic faith to be transmitted to the children of Roman . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Health ex parte Quintavalle (on behalf of Pro-Life Alliance) HL 13-Mar-2003
Court to seek and Apply Parliamentary Intention
The appellant challenged the practice of permitting cell nuclear replacement (CNR), saying it was either outside the scope of the Act, or was for a purpose which could not be licensed under the Act.
Held: The challenge failed. The court was to . .
Cited – Salomon v A Salomon and Company Ltd HL 16-Nov-1896
A Company and its Directors are not same paersons
Mr Salomon had incorporated his long standing personal business of shoe manufacture into a limited company. He held nearly all the shares, and had received debentures on the transfer into the company of his former business. The business failed, and . .
Cited – Coles v Odhams Press Ltd 1936
Lord Hewart CJ said that courts should avoid ‘taking blind shots at a hidden target’. . .
Cited – Ulster Transport Authority v James Brown and Sons Ltd CANI 1953
The repeal of a statutory exemption which had allowed the company to trade in competition with a government established board providing the same services, was ‘a device for diverting a definite part of the business of furniture removers and storage . .
Cited – Corocraft Ltd v Pan American Airways Inc 1969
In the event of inconsistency between the French and English versions of the Convention, the French text prevails. . .
Cited – Kokkinakis v Greece ECHR 25-May-1993
kokkinakis_greeceECHR1993
The defendant was convicted for proselytism contrary to Greek law. He claimed a breach of Article 9.
Held: To say that Jehovah’s Witness were proselytising criminally was excessive. Punishment for proselytising was unlawful in the . .
Cited – Black-Clawson International Ltd v Papierwerke Waldhof Aschaffenburg AG HL 5-Mar-1975
Statute’s Mischief May be Inspected
The House considered limitations upon them in reading statements made in the Houses of Parliament when construing a statute.
Held: It is rare that a statute can be properly interpreted without knowing the legislative object. The courts may . .

Cited by:
Cited – Jackson and others v Attorney General HL 13-Oct-2005
The applicant sought to challenge the 2004 Hunting Act, saying that it had been passed under the provisions of the 1949 Parliament Act which was itself an unlawful extension of the powers given by the 1911 Parliament Act to allow the House of . .
Cited – Boulton v Regina CACD 26-Apr-2007
The defendant appealed convictions for rape and other serious sexual offences, and witness intimidation. He complained that witnesses had been allowed to have their evidence read out because of their fear of him.
Held: In view of the extent of . .
Cited – Bogdanic v The Secretary of State for The Home Department QBD 29-Aug-2014
The claimant challenged fines imposed on him after three illegal immigrants were found to have hidden in his lorry in the immigration control zone at Dunkirk. The 1999 At was to have been amended by the 2002 Act, and the implementation was by the . .
Cited – Human Rights Commission for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland : Abortion) SC 7-Jun-2018
The Commission challenged the compatibility of the NI law relating to banning nearly all abortions with Human Rights Law. It now challenged a decision that it did not have standing to bring the case.
Held: (Lady Hale, Lord Kerr and Lord Wilson . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 26 July 2021; Ref: scu.225010

The Attorney General for Northern Ireland and Another v The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission: CANI 29 Jun 2017

Appeal by the Attorney General and Department of Justice against an Order declaring that sections 58 and 59 of the 1861 Act and section 25 of the 1945 Act were incompatible with Article 8 of ECHR insofar as it is an offence:
(i) to procure a miscarriage at any stage during a pregnancy where the foetus has been diagnosed with a fatal foetal abnormality;
(ii) to procure a miscarriage up to the date when the foetus is capable of being born alive where a pregnancy arises as a result of rape or incest.
Lord Chief Justice, Sir Declan Morgan, suggested that it was possible to construe the words, ‘for the purpose only of preserving the life of the mother’ so as to include circumstances where the mother’s life ‘was significantly adversely affected’: ‘I accept that the grain of the 1861 Act and the 1945 Act was intended to provide substantial protection for the foetus but in my view the phrase ‘for the purpose of preserving the life of the mother’ cannot in present circumstances be interpreted reasonably as confining protection for the mother by way of abortion to those circumstances where it is likely that she will be a physical or mental wreck. I have had the benefit of affidavits sworn in these proceedings by Sarah Ewart and AT [Ashleigh Topley]. Some aspects of the effect on these women of the prohibition of abortion in this jurisdiction in their circumstances have been described in [earlier paras of the judgment]. The present law prioritises the need to protect to a reasonable extent the life that women in these emotionally devastating situations can enjoy. In my opinion that requires the court to determine what is reasonably tolerable in today’s society. That is not to be defined by the values of the 1930s. I conclude that circumstances such as those described in those affidavits fall within the scope of the Bourne exception interpreted in accordance with that test. I consider that in each case the effects on these women were such that the option of abortion in this jurisdiction after appropriate advice should have been open. That conclusion is not dependent upon the state of health of the foetus.’
Gillen LJ expressed disagreement with these statements. He considered that it was ‘institutionally inappropriate’ for the court to ‘change the effect of the legislation and its interpretation in R v Bourne’.
Morgan LCJ, Gillen LJ and Weatherup LJ
[2017] NICA 42
Bailii
Offences against the Person Act 1861 58 59, Criminal Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 1945 25, European Convention on Human Rights 8
Northern Ireland
Citing:
Cited – Family Planning Association of Northern Ireland v Minister for Health Social Services and Public Safety CANI 8-Oct-2004
A termination of pregnancy is lawful when its continuation would threaten the woman’s life or when it would probably affect her physical or mental health but only if the effect would be serious and, in particular, permanent or long-term . .

Cited by:
Appeal from – Human Rights Commission for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland : Abortion) SC 7-Jun-2018
The Commission challenged the compatibility of the NI law relating to banning nearly all abortions with Human Rights Law. It now challenged a decision that it did not have standing to bring the case.
Held: (Lady Hale, Lord Kerr and Lord Wilson . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 26 July 2021; Ref: scu.605108

The Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis v Thorpe: Admn 18 Nov 2015

Appeal by way of case stated against a decision of the Ealing Magistrates Court to impose a football banning order under section 14B of the Football Spectators Act 1989 with a limitation which the Appellant says is unlawful.
Edis J
[2015] EWHC 3339 (Admin)
Bailii
Football Spectators Act 1989 14B
England and Wales

Updated: 26 July 2021; Ref: scu.554983

Saadi v Italy (United Kingdom intervening): ECHR 28 Feb 2008

(Grand Chamber) When considering the appropriateness of a deportation order to a country with which the deporting country had a memorandum of understanding that the destination country would not torture the deportee, a court must look beyond the memorandum to see the value of it, and ‘whether substantial grounds have been shown for believing that there is a real risk of treatment incompatible with article 3’
The Grand Chamber made a distinction between arbitrariness in the context of article 5(1)(a) and in the context of other sub-paragraphs of article 5(1). It said: ‘One general principle established in the case-law is that detention will be ‘arbitrary’ where, despite complying with the letter of national law, there has been an element of bad faith or deception on the part of the authorities (see, for example, Bozano v France, 18 December 1986, Series A no 111, and Conka v Belgium, Application No 51564/99, ECHR 2002-I). The condition that there be no arbitrariness further demands that both the order to detain and the execution of the detention must genuinely conform with the purpose of the restrictions permitted by the relevant sub-paragraph of article 5(1) (see Winterwerp, cited above, 39; Bouamar v Belgium, 29 February 1988, 50, Series A no 129; and O’Hara v The United Kingdom, Application No 37555/97, 34, ECHR 2001-X).There must in addition be some relationship between the ground of permitted deprivation of liberty relied on and the place and conditions of detention (see Bouamar, 50, cited above; Aerts v Belgium, 30 July 1998, 46, Reports 1998-V; and Enhorn v Sweden, Application No 56529/00, 42, ECHR 2005-I).
The notion of arbitrariness in the contexts of sub-paras (b), (d) and (e) also includes an assessment whether detention was necessary to achieve the stated aim. The detention of an individual is such a serious measure that it is justified only as a last resort where other, less severe measures have been considered and found to be insufficient to safeguard the individual or public interest which might require that the person concerned be detained (see Witold Litwa, cited above, 78; Hilda Hafsteinsdottir v Iceland, Application No 40905/98, 51, 8 June 2004; and Enhorn, cited above, 44). The principle of proportionality further dictates that where detention is to secure the fulfilment of an obligation provided by law, a balance must be struck between the importance in a democratic society of securing the immediate fulfilment of the obligation in question, and the importance of the right to liberty (see Vasileva v Denmark, Application No 52792/99, 37, 25 September 2003). The duration of the detention is a relevant factor in striking such a balance (ibid, and see also McVeigh and Others v The United Kingdom, Applications Nos 8022/77, 8025/77, 8027/77, Commission’s report of 18 March 1981, Decisions and Reports 25, p 15 at pp 37-38 and 42).
The court applies a different approach towards the principle that there should be no arbitrariness in cases of detention under article 5(1)(a), where, in the absence of bad faith or one of the other grounds set out in para 69 above, as long as the detention follows and has a sufficient causal connection with a lawful conviction, the decision to impose a sentence of detention and the length of that sentence are matters for the national authorities rather than for the Court under article 5(1) (see T v The United Kingdom [GC], Application No 24724/94, 103, 16 December 1999, and also Stafford v The United Kingdom [GC], Application No 46295/99, 64, ECHR 2002-IV).’
Jean-Paul Costa, P
37201/06, [2008] ECHR 179, (2008) 24 BHRC 123, [2008] INLR 621, (2009) 49 EHRR 30
Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights 5(1)
Human Rights
Cited by:
Cited – AS and DD (Libya) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another CA 9-Apr-2008
The claimants were subject to intended deportation to Libya. The said that if returned they would be likely to be tortured, and that accordingly the return would infringe their rights. The Home Secretary said that a memorandum of understanding . .
Cited – Al-Saadoon and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Defence Admn 19-Dec-2008
The two applicants had been detained by the armed forces in Iraq suspected of murder. They sought release before being transferred to the civilian authorities for trial saying that the trials would not be fair. The respondent denied that the . .
Cited – Norris v Government of United States of America SC 24-Feb-2010
The defendant faced extradition to the USA on charges of the obstruction of justice. He challenged the extradition on the basis that it would interfere with his article 8 rights to family life, given that the offence was merely ancillary, the result . .
Cited – Kambadzi (previously referred to as SK (Zimbabwe)) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 25-May-2011
False Imprisonment Damages / Immigration Detention
The respondent had held the claimant in custody, but had failed to follow its own procedures. The claimant appealed against the rejection of his claim of false imprisonment. He had overstayed his immigration leave, and after convictions had served a . .
Cited – Equality and Human Rights Commission v Prime Minister and Others Admn 3-Oct-2011
The defendant had published a set of guidelines for intelligence officers called upon to detain and interrogate suspects. The defendant said that the guidelines could only be tested against individual real life cases, and that the court should not . .
Cited – EM (Eritrea), Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 19-Feb-2014
SSHD must examine safety of country for return
The Court was asked: ‘Is an asylum seeker or refugee who resists his or her return from the United Kingdom to Italy (the country in which she or he first sought or was granted asylum) required to establish that there are in Italy ‘systemic . .
Cited – Haney and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Justice SC 10-Dec-2014
The four claimants, each serving indeterminate prison sentences, said that as they approached the times when thy might apply for parol, they had been given insufficient support and training to meet the requirements for release. The courts below had . .
Cited – Lord Advocate (Representing The Taiwanese Judicial Authorities) v Dean SC 28-Jun-2017
(Scotland) The respondent was to be extradited to Taiwan to serve the balance of a prison term. His appeal succeeded and the order quashed on the basis that his treatment in the Taiwanese prison system would infringe his human rights. The Lord . .
Cited – Human Rights Commission for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland : Abortion) SC 7-Jun-2018
The Commission challenged the compatibility of the NI law relating to banning nearly all abortions with Human Rights Law. It now challenged a decision that it did not have standing to bring the case.
Held: (Lady Hale, Lord Kerr and Lord Wilson . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 26 July 2021; Ref: scu.266262

Phillips, Regina v: CACD 26 Mar 2019

Appeal from conviction and sentence after conviction of being concerned in the production of a Class B controlled drug (cannabis), contrary to section 4(2(b) of the Misuse of Drugs Act (count 1) and of transferring criminal property, contrary to section 327(1)(d) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (count 2).
[2019] EWCA Crim 577
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 26 July 2021; Ref: scu.637806

Regina v Coughlan and Young: CACD 1976

Coughlan and Young were convicted at Birmingham Crown Court of conspiracy to cause explosions in the United Kingdom, the prosecution having limited the allegation to explosions in Birmingham and its neighbourhood. Charges had been brought in respect of the ‘sub-agreements’ or ‘sub-conspiracies’ to cause explosions in Manchester and Birmingham.
Lawton LJ said: ‘There is no difficulty in law about alleging a separate conspiracy to cause explosions in Manchester and another to cause explosions in Birmingham, even though some, or it may be all of the conspirators, may have been parties to a wider agreement to cause explosions throughout the United Kingdom, including Birmingham and Manchester. The wider agreement or conspiracy would not preclude the existence of sub-agreements or sub-conspiracies to cause explosions in particular places, and as a matter of law these sub-conspiracies or agreements could properly be charged as separate offences.’
There had been publicity following an unsuccessful plea of autrefois convict which tended to disclose an earlier conviction. Lawton LJ said: ‘It is our experience that juries in general understand the responsibility which rests upon them. They know that they have to be sure of guilt on the evidence before returning a verdict of guilty. The fault with juries nowadays lies not in convicting when they should acquit but in acquitting when they should convict. Juries are capable of disregarding that which is not properly before them. They are expected to disregard what one accused says about another in his absence. If they can do that, which is far from easy, they can disregard what has been said in a newspaper.’ and ‘There is no difficulty in law about alleging a separate conspiracy to cause explosions in Manchester and another to cause explosions in Birmingham, even though some, or it may be all of the conspirators, may have been parties to a wider agreement to cause explosions throughout the United Kingdom, including Birmingham and Manchester. The wider agreement or conspiracy would not preclude the existence of sub-agreements or sub-conspiracies to cause explosions in particular places, and as a matter of law these sub-conspiracies or agreements could properly be charged as separate offences. Acquittal or conviction on a charge of one such offence would be no bar to the trial of the same accused on another.’
Lawton LJ
[1976] 63 Cr App R 33
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Alibhai and Others CACD 30-Mar-2004
The defendants appealed against their convictions for conspiracy to manufacture and distribute counterfeit Microsoft products. They said that inadequate disclosure had been provided by Microsoft. The principal witness was a participating informant . .
Cited – Regina v Abu Hamza CACD 28-Nov-2006
hamza_rCACD2006
The defendant had faced trial on terrorist charges. He claimed that delay and the very substantial adverse publicity had made his fair trial impossible, and that it was not an offence for a foreign national to solicit murders to be carried out . .
Cited – Regina v Stone CACD 14-Feb-2001
The defendant appealed against his conviction in 1998 of murder based on a confession said to have been made to a fellow prisoner on remand. A witness supporting that confession said after the trial that he had lied under police pressure. The appeal . .
Cited – Serious Fraud Office v Papachristos and Another CACD 19-Sep-2014
The applicants challenged their convictions and sentences for conspiracy to corrupt. They owned a company manufacturing fuel additives. Technology developments meant that they came under increasing pressure on sales. They were said to have entered . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 July 2021; Ref: scu.237906

Nero and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 29 Mar 2012

Parties appealed against convictions for aggravated trespass under the 1994 Act arising from trespassing demonstrations. They argued that the lawfulness of the activity being carried out on the land subject to the trespass is an ingredient in the offence of aggravated trespass. Accordingly, where material is advanced to indicate that the activity is or might not be lawful then, in the ordinary way, the prosecution must negate that defence to the criminal standard.
Held: The appeals under section 68 failed: ‘the cause which the appellants wish to champion, if it is to be litigated, can only be litigated in proceedings properly constituted for the purpose. Of course it goes without saying that the appellants are perfectly entitled to demonstrate and protest. But I do not think that the law allows them to resist a prosecution for aggravated trespass under section 68 by requiring an adjudication of the occupation of the Palestinian territories and associated matters.’
However, section 68 plainly included a company within the expression ‘person engaging in’ (lawful activity).
The appeals under section 69 succeeded. The defendants had tied themselves together within a concrete tube before the police direction was given.
The court certified a question for the Supreme Court: ‘Should the words ‘lawful activity’ in section 68 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 be limited to acts or events that are ‘integral’ to the activities at the premises in question?’
Laws LJ, Owen J
[2012] EWHC 1238 (Admin)
Bailii
Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 68 69
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Tilly v Director of Public Prosecutions QBD 16-Oct-2001
The applicant had been convicted of aggravated trespass. She had gone onto farm land and destroyed genetically modified crops. She appealed.
Held: For the offence of aggravated trespass, it was necessary to show unlawful interference with . .
Cited – Ayliffe and others v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 21-Apr-2005
The case concerned actions taken at military bases by way of protest against the Iraq war. Each raised questions arising from the prosecution of the appellants for offences of aggravated trespass. The defendants asserted, among other things, that . .
Cited – Steel and Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 23-Sep-1998
The several applicants had been arrested in different circumstances and each charged with breach of the peace contrary to common law. Under the Magistrates’ Court Act 1980, the court can bind over a Defendant to keep the peace, if the Defendant . .

Cited by:
Cited – Bauer and Others v The Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 22-Mar-2013
bauer_dppAdmn2013
The appellants had entered Fortnum and Masons to demonstrate against tax avoidance. They appealed against convitions for aggravated trespass.
Held: The statutory question posed by s.68 is whether the prosecution can prove that the trespasser . .
Appeal from – Richardson and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions SC 5-Feb-2014
The defendants had protested against the activities of a shop, by trespassing. They were said to have committed the offence of aggravated trespass under section 68 of the 1994 Act. They objected in part that this infringed their article 10 right of . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 July 2021; Ref: scu.460335

Atlasnavios-Navegacao, LDA v Navigators Insurance Company Ltd and Others: ComC 8 Dec 2014

The claimant’s vessel and its crew had been detained after illegal drugs were found to be attached to its hull in port in Venezuela by ship crew members. The ship owners asserted effective total loss.
Held: The owners were entitled to recover from insurers. The cause of the vessel’s loss was the malicious act of unknown third parties in attaching the drugs to the hull, and the exclusion of detainment, etc ‘by reason of infringement of any customs . . regulations’ in clause 4.1.5 was to be read as subject to an implied limitation where the only reason for such infringement was such an act.
Flaux J
[2014] EWHC 4133 (Comm), [2015] All ER (Comm) 439, [2015] CN 59
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Preliminary Issues – Atlasnavios-Navegacao, Lda v Navigators Insurance Company Ltd and Others ComC 29-Mar-2012
Trial of preliminary issues in an action in which the Claimant claims under its war risks insurance for the constructive total loss of the vessel ‘B Atlantic’ (‘the Vessel’). Between 7 and 12 August 2007 the Vessel loaded a cargo of coal at . .

Cited by:
At ComC – Atlasnavios-Navegacao, Lda v Navigators Insurance Company Ltd and Others CA 1-Aug-2016
(The B Atlantic) The court was asked whether Flaux J was right to find that the owners of a ship were entitled to be indemnified by the insurers in respect of the constructive total loss of the vessel under war insurance after detention ‘by reason . .
At ComC – Navigators Insurance Company Ltd and Others v Atlasnavios-Navegacao Lda SC 22-May-2018
The vessel had been taken by the authorities in Venezuela after drugs were found to have been attached to its hull by third parties. Six months later it was declared a constructive total loss. The ship owners now sought recovery of its value from . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 July 2021; Ref: scu.539960

Rex v Bourne: 1939

An eminent surgeon openly in a public hospital operated to terminate the pregnancy of a 14 year old girl who had become pregnant in consequence of a violent rape.
Held: The court suggested when summing up that there might be a duty in certain circumstances to abort an unborn child to save the life of the mother. The defence of necessity might be available. The judge directed the jury that the inclusion of the word ‘unlawfully’, in the statutory definition of the offence of procuring a miscarriage with intent, made it incumbent on the Crown to prove that the act was not ‘done in good faith for the purpose only of preserving the life of the mother’, and further that, in considering whether there was any clear line of distinction between danger to health and to life, the jury should take ‘a reasonable view’ of the latter words.
‘Nine years ago Parliament passed an Act called the Infant Life (Preservation) Act, 1929 . . S1, subs-s1 of that Act provides that ‘any person who, with the intent to destroy the life of a child capable of being born alive, by any wilful act causes a child to die before it has an existence independent of its mother, shall be guilty of felony, to wit, of child destruction, and shall be liable on conviction thereof on indictment to penal servitude for life: Provided that no person shall be found guilty of an offence under this section unless it is proved that the act which caused the death of the child was not done in good faith for the purpose only of preserving the life of the mother.’ It is true, as Mr. Oliver has said, that this enactment provides for the case where a child is killed by a wilful act at the time when it is being delivered in the ordinary course of nature; but in my view the proviso that it is necessary for the Crown to prove that the act was not done in good faith for the purpose only of preserving the life of the mother is in accordance with what has always been the common law of England with regard to the killing of an unborn child. No such proviso is in fact set out in s58 of the Offences Against the Person Act, 1861; but the words of that section are that any person who ‘unlawfully’ uses an instrument with intent to procure a miscarriage shall be guilty of felony. In my opinion the word ‘unlawfully’ is not, in that section, a meaningless word. I think it imports the meaning expressed by the proviso in s1, subs1, of the Infant Life (Preservation) Act, 1929, and that s58 of the Offences Against the Person Act, 1861, must be read as if the words making it an offence to use an instrument with intent to procure a miscarriage were qualified by a similar proviso.’
Macnaghten J
[1939] 1 KB 687
Infant Life (Preservation) Act, 1929, Offences Against the Person Act 1861 58
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – In Re A (Minors) (Conjoined Twins: Medical Treatment); aka In re A (Children) (Conjoined Twins: Surgical Separation) CA 22-Sep-2000
Twins were conjoined (Siamese). Medically, both could not survive, and one was dependent upon the vital organs of the other. Doctors applied for permission to separate the twins which would be followed by the inevitable death of one of them. The . .
Cited – Regina (Smeaton) v Secretary of State for Health and Others Admn 18-Apr-2002
The claimant challenged the Order as regards the prescription of the morning-after pill, asserting that the pill would cause miscarriages, and that therefore the use would be an offence under the 1861 Act.
Held: ‘SPUC’s case is that any . .
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 . .
Cited – Doogan and Another v NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde Health Board SCS 24-Apr-2013
(Extra Division, Inner House) The reclaimers, Roman Catholic midwives working on a labour ward as co-ordinators, sought to assert a right of conscientious objection under the 1967 Act. The respondents said that only those directly involved in the . .
Cited – Royal College of Nursing of the United Kingdom v Department of Health and Social Security HL 2-Jan-1981
The court was asked whether nurses could properly involve themselves in a pregnancy termination procedure not known when the Act was passed, and in particular, whether a pregnancy was ‘terminated by a medical practitioner’, when it was carried out . .
Cited – Human Rights Commission for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland : Abortion) SC 7-Jun-2018
The Commission challenged the compatibility of the NI law relating to banning nearly all abortions with Human Rights Law. It now challenged a decision that it did not have standing to bring the case.
Held: (Lady Hale, Lord Kerr and Lord Wilson . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 July 2021; Ref: scu.213664

Regina v Andrews: CACD 15 Oct 2003

The defendant sought leave to appeal her conviction for murder saying that a finding of manslaughter was appropriate for her diminished responsibility.
Held: There was insufficient evidence to establish that the judge’s directions on the effect of the lies told by the defendant were incorrect.
Mr Justice Forbes Lord Justice Kennedy Mr Justice Aikens
[2003] EWCA Crim 2750
Bailii
Homicide Act 1957 2
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Ahluwalia CACD 31-Jul-1992
The appellant sought substitution of a conviction for manslaughter of her husband for that of his murder. She had long suffered violent treatment by him. She had not raised the issue of diminished responsibility at trial.
Held: The court . .
Cited – Regina v Bathurst CACD 1968
The judge was bound to direct the jury that a defendant was fully entitled to sit back and see if the prosecution had proved its case, and that they must not make any assumption of guilt from the fact that he had not gone into the witness box. . .
Cited – Regina v Richens CACD 5-Nov-1992
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder.
Held: The judge’s direction as to the effect of the defendant’s lies had been inadequate in relation to the issue of provocation.
Lord Taylor LCJ said: ‘(The judge’s) approach . .
Cited – Regina v Byrne CCA 1960
The defendant was a sexual psychopath who had strangled and mutilated a young woman resident of the YWCA. The case on his behalf was that he was unable to resist his impulse to gross and sadistic sexual violence. The judge’s directions had amounted . .

Cited by:
Cited – Hendy, Regina v CACD 12-Apr-2006
The applicant was sentenced to life imprisonment in 1992 for a brutal murder. He had pleaded diminished responsibility. There were now no papers from the trial. Medical evidence now suggested that at the time of the trial he would have suffered a . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 July 2021; Ref: scu.187006

Daley v The Queen: PC 8 Dec 1997

(Jamaica) Whether murder was a capital murder under Jamaican legislation. The board explained the effect of s2(2) of the Act. Where two or more persons are found guilty of any of the categories of murder referred to in subsection (1) – except that referred to in paragraph (e), which refers to murder committed pursuant to an arrangement whereby money passes as consideration for causing or assisting in causing a person’s death – one or other of three additional tests must be satisfied before any of them can be found guilty of capital murder. These are (1) that the person by his own act caused the death of the person murdered; (2) that the person inflicted or attempted to inflict grievous bodily harm on the person murdered; and (3) that the person himself used violence on the person murdered in the course or furtherance of an attack on that person. It is necessary for the trial judge in a case where two or more persons are accused of capital murder, except that of the kind mentioned in paragraph (e) of section 1(1), to give a direction about the application to the case of section 2(2).
[1997] UKPC 58, [1998] 1 WLR 494
Bailii
Offences against the Person Act 1864 2(2)
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Hunter, Moodie v The Queen PC 8-Oct-2003
PC (Jamaica) The defendants appealed against their convictions for capital murder.
Held: The appeals were allowed, and non-capital convictions substituted. It is not enough to comply with section 2(2), for . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 July 2021; Ref: scu.159270

Regina v Bogacki: CACD 1973

The three defendants had been charged with attempting to take a motor bus without authority. They had gone to a bus garage late at night and attempted to start the engine of a bus without success. The trial judge directed the jury as follows, adverting specifically to the change of language between section 12 of the Act of 1968 and section 217 of the Act of 1960. He said: ‘The offence is not, I repeat, the offence is not taking and driving away, it is merely taking and taking, members of the jury, means assuming possession of an object for your own unauthorised use, however temporary that assumption of possession might be. Kay I give you an example. Suppose that you left your motor car parked in the car park behind a cinema, and you forgot to lock the door but you shut the door, and suppose that a man and a woman, some time later, when the motor car was unattended, came along, opened the door, got into the car, and had sexual intercourse in the car. This particular offence would then have been committed by them’. Later he said with respect to the defendants before him: ‘The question is: Did they, without the permission of the owners, acquire possession, for however short a time, for their own unauthorised purpose? That is the question.’
Held: Roskill LJ said: ‘ ‘The word ‘take’ is an ordinary simple English word and it is undesirable that where Parliament has used an ordinary simple English word elaborate glosses should be put upon it. What is sought to be said is that ‘take’ is the equivalent of ‘use’ and that mere unauthorised user of itself constitutes an offence against section 12. It is to be observed that if one treats ‘takes’ as a synonym for ‘uses’, the subsection has to be read in this way: ‘if . . he uses any conveyance for his own or another’s use . . ‘ That involves the second employment of the word ‘use’ being tautologous, and this court can see no justification where Parliament has used the phrase ‘if . . he takes any conveyance for his own or another’s use’ for construing this language as meaning if he ‘uses any conveyance for his own or another’s use,’ thus giving no proper effect to the words ‘for his own or another’s use.’ For those reasons the court accepts Mr. Lowry’s submission that there is still built in, if I may use the phrase, to the word ‘takes’ in the subsection the concept of movement and that before a man can be convicted of the completed offence under section 12 (1) it must be shown that he took the vehicle, that is to say, that there was an unauthorised taking possession or control of the vehicle by him adverse to the rights of the true owner or person otherwise entitled to such possession or control, coupled with some movement, however small . . of that vehicle following such unauthorised taking.’
Roskill LJ
[1973] 1 QB 832
Theft Act 1968 12, Traffic Act 1960 217
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Bow CACD 24-Nov-1976
The defendant appealed against his conviction for taking a motor vehicle without authority.
Held: Bridge LJ said: ‘where as here, a conveyance is taken and moved in a way which necessarily involves its use as a conveyance, the taker cannot be . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 24 July 2021; Ref: scu.544330

Cobley, Regina v: CACD 29 Jun 2021

Appeal from conviction of murder of a child – mental state at the relevant time, in the somewhat unusual circumstances that occurred at trial.
Macur LJ
[2021] EWCA Crim 954
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 23 July 2021; Ref: scu.665795

Regina v Steele: 1993

The defendant appealed his conviction for possession of a firearm without a certificate.
Held: The offence was absolute. The defendant was guilty because he knew he had a holdall with contents even though he did not know what those contents were.
[1993] Crim LR 298
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Atkins v Director of Public Prosecutions; Goodland v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 8-Mar-2000
For possession of an indecent image of a child to be proved, it was necessary to establish some knowledge of its existence. Images stored without the defendant’s knowledge by browser software in a hidden cache, of which he was also unaware, were not . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 22 July 2021; Ref: scu.199233

Papadimitropolus v Regina: 1956

High Court of Australia. The rape complainant wrongly believed that she had gone through a marriage with the appellant.
Held: ‘Rape is carnal knowledge of a woman without her consent. Carnal knowledge is the physical act of penetration. It is the consent to such physical act of penetration which is in question upon an indictment for rape. Such a consent demands a perception as to what is about to take place, as to the identity of the man and the character of what he is doing. Once the consent is comprehending and actual, the inducing causes cannot destroy its reality and leave the man guilty of rape.’
‘It must be noted that in considering whether an apparent consent is unreal it is the mistake or misapprehension that makes it so. It is not the fraud producing the mistake which is material so much as the mistake itself. But if the mistake or misapprehension is not produced by the fraud of a man, there is logically room for the possibility that he was unaware of the woman’s mistake so that a question of his mens rea may arise. So in R. v. Lambert Cussen J says: ‘It is plain that, though in these cases the question of consent or non consent is primarily referable to the mind of the woman, if she has really a mind, yet the mind of the man is also affected by the facts which indicate want of consent or possible want of capacity to consent’. For that reason it is easy to understand why the stress has been on the fraud. But that stress tends to distract the attention from the essential inquiry, namely, whether the consent is no consent because it is not directed to the nature and character of the act. The identity of the man and character of the physical act that is done or proposed seem now clearly to be regarded as forming part of the nature and character of the act to which the woman’s consent is directed. That accords with the principles governing mistake vitiating apparent manifestations of will in other chapters of the law.
In the present case the decision of the majority of the Full Court extends this conception beyond the identity of the physical act and the immediate conditions affecting its nature to an antecedent inducing cause the existence of a valid marriage. In the history of bigamy that has never been done. The most heartless bigamist has not been considered guilty of rape. Mock marriages are no new thing. Before the Hardwicke Marriage Act it was a fraud easily devised and readily carried out. But there is no reported instance of an indictment for rape based on the fraudulent character of the ceremony. No indictment of rape was founded on such a fraud. Rape, as a capital felony, was defined with exactness, and although there has been some extension over the centuries in the ambit of the crime, it is quite wrong to bring within its operation forms of evil conduct because they wear some analogy to aspects of the crime and deserve punishment. The judgment of the majority of the Full Court of the Supreme Court goes upon the moral differences between marital intercourse and sexual relations without marriage. The difference is indeed so radical that it is apt to draw the mind away from the real question which is carnal knowledge without consent. It may well be true that the woman in the present case never intended to consent to the latter relationship. But, as was said before, the key to such a case as the present lies in remembering that it is the penetration of the woman’s body without her consent to such penetration that makes the felony. The capital felony was not directed to fraudulent conduct inducing her consent. Frauds of that kind must be punished under other heads of the criminal law or not at all: they are not rape. To say that in the present case the facts which the jury must be taken to have found amount to wicked and heartless conduct on the part of the applicant is not enough to establish that he committed rape. To say that in having intercourse with him she supposed that she was concerned in a perfectly moral act is not to say that the intercourse was without her consent. To return to the central point; rape is carnal knowledge of a woman without her consent: carnal knowledge is the physical fact of penetration; it is the consent to that which is in question; such a consent demands a perception as to what is about to take place, as to the identity of the man and the character of what he was doing. But once the consent is comprehending and actual the inducing causes cannot destroy its reality and leave the man guilty of rape.’
Sir Owen Dixon CJ, McTiernan J, Webb J, Kitto J and Taylor J
[1956] CLR 249
Australia
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Linekar CACD 21-Oct-1994
L appealed against his conviction for rape. His victim was a woman working as a prostitute. He said that he had simply made off afterwards without payment. He was convicted on the basis that he had procured the act by a false pretence by him that he . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 22 July 2021; Ref: scu.554813

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 entry. He was later charged and convicted under section 51(3) of the 1964 Act of wilfully obstructing the officers. He now appealed saying that the officers had not given their reason for wanting entry.
Held: The appeal failed. They had a statutory right to enter, and this was independent of any failure to give reasons. In such circumstamces, the failure to allow the officers entry could amount to the offence of wilful obstruction.
[1993] Crim LR 534
Road Traffic Act 1988 4, 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 – Swales v Cox CA 1981
Police officers had entered a house in pursuit of a suspected burglar.
Held: It is a condition of any lawful breaking of premises that the person seeking entry has demanded and been refused entry by the occupier.
Donaldson LJ said: ‘it . .
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 – Bastable v Little 1907
The police had set up a series of speed traps in London Road, Croydon. Mr Little occupied himself giving warning signals to drivers approaching the traps, thus ensuring that they did not exceed the speed limit. There was no evidence that the drivers . .
Cited – 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 . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 22 July 2021; Ref: scu.550173

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 1953. He shouted warnings to the licensee, who did not open the door to the police officers until 11.25 p.m. The licensee was not found to be committing any offence. The police had the right to enter licensed premises, whether an offence was being committed or not. The appellant was convicted under section 2 of the 1885 Act which prescribes the punishment for an assault on a constable in the execution of his duty, ‘shall apply to all cases of resisting or wilfully obstructing any constable or peace officer in the execution of his duty.’ On appeal, he submitted that he could not be convicted of obstructing a constable when in the execution of his duty unless it was shown that the licensee had committed an offence.
Held: ‘obstructing’, within the meaning of s. 2 of the Prevention of Crimes Amendment Act 1885 meant making it more difficult for the police to carry out their duties; under s. 151 (1) of the Licensing Act 1953 it was the duty of the police to enter licensed premises if they thought it likely tbat an offence might be committed, and, therefore, the appellant, in making it difficult for the police to enter the inn, was guilty of wilfully obstructing a constable when in the execution of his duty, and was rightly convicted under s. 2 of the Act of 1885.
Lord Goddard CJ, Cassels, Streatfield JJ
[1955] NZ Police Law Rp 18, [1955] 1 WLR 1207, [1955] 3 All ER 406, (1955) 120 JP 13
NZLII
Prevention of Crimes Amendment Act 1885 2, Licensing Act 1953 151
England and Wales
Citing:
Distinguished – Bastable v Little 1907
The police had set up a series of speed traps in London Road, Croydon. Mr Little occupied himself giving warning signals to drivers approaching the traps, thus ensuring that they did not exceed the speed limit. There was no evidence that the drivers . .

Cited by:
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 – 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 . .
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 . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 22 July 2021; Ref: scu.550174

Kureembokus, Regina v: CACD 25 May 2021

Appeal from conviction of having ‘intentionally arranged or facilitated an act which he intended to do which would involve the commission of an offence under any of sections 9 to 13 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, namely penetrative sexual activity with a child under 16’ He said that he did not in fact believe that the person involved was under age.
Held: The appeal failed.
[2021] EWCA Crim 828
Bailii
Sexual Offences Act 2003 9 10 1 12 13
England and Wales

Updated: 22 July 2021; Ref: scu.665793

IPH v Chief Constable of South Wales: QBD 1987

The 11 year old defendant joined others in smashing the windows of a motor van, scraping its paintwork and pushing it into a post. He appealed his conviction for malicious damage.
Held: The conviction was quashed. There had been no evidence before the Magistrates that he knew that what he was doing was wrong.
[1987] Crim LR 42
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – 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: 21 July 2021; Ref: scu.341826

Pitcher, Regina v: CACD 8 Jul 2021

Appeal from conviction of murder, the applicant contending the trial judge erred in providing the jury with a ‘lies’ direction in respect of prosecution witness and that this misdirection rendered the applicant’s conviction unsafe.
Mrs Justice Eady
[2021] EWCA Crim 1013
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 20 July 2021; Ref: scu.665800

Aslam, Regina v: CACD 22 Oct 2004

The appellant had pleaded guilty to a number of offences of dishonesty and asked for a number of others to be taken into consideration. One of the offences to which he had pleaded guilty and one of those which he had asked to be taken into consideration had occurred before the coming into force of the 1995 Act. On this account, it was argued on his behalf that the court had no jurisdiction to make a confiscation order under the 1995 legislation.
Held: The argument was rejected.
Bean J said: ‘The legislative purpose of section 16(5), as it seems to us, was to prevent the Crown from dividing convictions against a defendant in one set of proceedings into pre- and post-November 1, 1995 matters and then taking confiscation proceedings (concurrently or consecutively) under both statutes. So, if at the time the judge is asked to make a confiscation order under the 1995 Act on a number of counts there remains a pre-commencement count on which the Crown is seeking, or could still seek, a confiscation order under the 1988 Act as amended in 1993, there is no jurisdiction to make an order under the 1995 Act. However, if the pre-commencement count is one which could not be the basis of confiscation proceedings, there is no obstacle to using the 1995 Act regime. Similarly, if (as in this case) the Crown has expressly abandoned any reliance on the pre-commencement count for the purposes of a confiscation order, the fact that it could have sought such an order in respect of that count seems to us entirely immaterial. In such a case also, in our judgment, there is no obstacle to using in the 1995 Act regime in respect of the post-commencement counts. We do not understand Simpson to require a contrary conclusion.’
Bean J
[2004] EWCA Crim 2801, [2005] 1 Cr App R (S) 116
Bailii
Proceeds of Crime Act 1995 16(5)
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Sekhon, etc v Regina CACD 16-Dec-2002
The defendants appealed against confiscation orders on the basis that in various ways, the Crown had failed to comply with procedural requirements.
Held: The courts must remember the importance of such procedures in the fight against crime, . .

Cited by:
Cited – McCool, Regina v SC 2-May-2018
The appellants complained that the recovery order made against them in part under the transitional provisions were unlawful. They had claimed benefits as single people but were married to each other and for a house not occupied. The difficulty was . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 July 2021; Ref: scu.226784

Regina v Broch, Regina v Wyner: CACD 28 Dec 2000

On a charge allowing premises to be used for the supply of drugs, the defendant’s belief that he had taken sufficient steps to prevent drugs being supplied, was not a sufficient defence. The standard to be applied was the jury’s assessment, not that of the defendant. In this case the prosecution alleged that, given the degree of activity at the premises, the defendants must have known of the sale of drugs. Once the defendants knew that drugs were being sold, they had to take all reasonable and effective steps to prevent dealing. The word ‘reasonable’ did not have a subjective element.
Times 28-Dec-2000
Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 8(b)
England and Wales

Updated: 19 July 2021; Ref: scu.86227

Martin v Regina: CACD 30 Oct 2001

It would not be appropriate except in exceptional circumstances ‘which would make the evidence especially probative’ to take into account, when deciding whether excessive force was used in self-defence, that the defendant was suffering from a psychiatric condition.
Lord Woolf CJ, Wright and Grigson JJ
[2001] EWCA Crim 2245, [2003] QB 1
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – SO v The Crown CACD 11-Oct-2013
The defendant suffered from a psychiatric condition that caused him to believe in a state of affairs which did not exist.
Held: ‘an insane person cannot set the standards of reasonableness as to the degree of force used by reference to his own . .
Cited – Press and Another v Regina CACD 24-Oct-2013
Three defendants appealed against their convictions of assault. One defendant argued that the court did not direct the jury as to the effect of intoxication and/or post-traumatic stress disorder upon the issue of intent, and as to whether and to . .
Approved – Regina v Canns CACD 2005
The appellant, while in a secure hospital ward, had killed a male nurse. He was undoubtedly mentally disturbed at the time, suffering chronic paranoid schizophrenia. He was convicted of manslaughter by reason of diminished responsibility. His . .
Cited – McCool, Regina v SC 2-May-2018
The appellants complained that the recovery order made against them in part under the transitional provisions were unlawful. They had claimed benefits as single people but were married to each other and for a house not occupied. The difficulty was . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 July 2021; Ref: scu.167037

Regina v KJ Martin: CACD 20 Feb 2003

The defendant had been found unfit to plead on a charge of murder. Charges against the co-defendants were later reduced to inflicting grievous bodily harm, but when the defendant came to be dealt with, it was on the basis that the charge remained murder. The sole evidence against him was from a witness whose evidence was read because of his fear. He challenged the fairness of a trial in which the substantial evidence against him was not tested under cross examination.
Held: It could not be a rule of law that a witness’s evidence could not be read, where he was the only witness against the defendant. This would make the section of the 1988 Act otiose. A decision made by jury under a section 4A hearing was as to the actus reus only, and not as to intent. Here, however, the question was as to the defendant’s knowledge that another might commit a crime. Antoine says that a court should look to the physical acts of the defendant, and bear in mind the social purpose of the legislation. It must be recognised that the distinction is not always clear. The admission of evidence need not always be unfair, but in these circumstances the inability to tst the central witness in the case was fundamental. The witness may have had reasons not to tell the truth.
Lord Justice Potter The Honourable Mr Justice Mackay
[2003] 2 Cr App R 322, [2003] EWCA Crim 357
Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights, Criminal Justice Act 1988 23, Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 4A, European Convention on Human Rights
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Antoine HL 30-Mar-2000
The appellant sought to argue that despite having been found unfit to plead under the 1964 Act, it was still open to him to argue that the defence under section 2 of the 1957 Act applied, and that he was entitled to be plead diminished . .
Cited – Regina v O’Loughlin and McLoughlin 1988
. .
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 – Unterpertinger v Austria ECHR 24-Nov-1986
The defendant was convicted of causing actual bodily harm, mainly on the basis of statements which his wife and daughter had given to the police. His wife and daughter took advantage of their right not to give evidence at his trial and so could not . .

Cited by:
Cited – Sellick and Sellick, Regina v CACD 14-Mar-2005
The defendants appealed convictions for murder saying that the court had had read to it the statements of four witnesses who refused to attend for fear, having been intimidated. Other witnesses had been unco-operative and had been treated by the . .
Cited – Grant v The Queen PC 16-Jan-2006
(Jamaica) The defendant appealed his conviction for murder saying that the admission of an unsworn statement by one witness and the non-admission of another similar statement who did not either attend court was unconstitutional. He shot the victim . .
Cited – Regina v Davis HL 18-Jun-2008
The defendant had been tried for the murder of two men by shooting them at a party. He was identified as the murderer by three witnesses who had been permitted to give evidence anonymously, from behind screens, because they had refused, out of fear, . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 July 2021; Ref: scu.179577

Sofroniou v Regina: CACD 18 Dec 2003

The defendant appealed conviction on charges of obtaining services by deception under the section. He had obtained a credit card dishonestly and operated bank accounts dishonestly over a period of time.
Held: His acts could constitute the obtaining of services, provided only that the parties expected that these services would be charged for. ‘The section envisaged a putative objective or moral understanding as to payment on the assumption that the inducement was not dishonest’
Lord Justice May Mr Justice Mckinnon His Honour Judge Jeremy Roberts Q.C.
[2003] EWCA Crim 3681, Times 05-Jan-2004
Bailii
Theft Act 1978 1(1)
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Halai CACD 15-Jul-1982
The defendant went to his solicitor, who was also an agent of a building society, to raise a mortgage to purchase a house. The defendant gave false details in the form which was intended to induce the building society to make an advance. He signed . .
Cited – Regina v Brown (K) CACD 1984
The defendant was accused of fraudulently inducing the investment of money. The means by which that investment was induced was an essential ingredient. A number of matters were specified in the charge as together constituting that ingredient.
Cited – Regina v Teong Sun Chuah CACD 1991
. .
Applied – Regina v Shortland CACD 1995
The appellant opened two bank accounts under an assumed name. There was no direct evidence of any understanding that the provision of banking services had been or would be paid for. The judge rejected a submission of no case to answer saying that it . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 July 2021; Ref: scu.189922

Director of Public Prosecutions v Meaden: Admn 1 Dec 2003

The defendant had been charged with assaulting a police officer in the execution of his duty. The prosecutor appealed a finding of no case to answer. He had been present in a house when the police executed search warrants. He had refused to obey an order requiring him to stay in one room whilst an officer searched the remainder of the house.
Held: The warrant had been to search both the house and anybody present. That implied a power to detain the person to be searched for a short period. There is no general power of arrest for obstructing a police officer in the execution of his duty.
Rose LJ, Jackson J
[2003] EWHC 3005 (Admin), Times 02-Jan-2004, [2004] 1 WLR 945, [2004] 4 All ER 75
Bailii
Police Act 1996 89(1) 89(2), Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984
England and Wales
Citing:
Distinguished – Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police v Hepburn CA 13-Dec-2002
The claimant sought damages from the police. They had executed a search warrant, and one officer detained the claimant during the raid.
Held: A person who mistakenly restrained an individual in the mistaken belief that he had been lawfully . .
Cited – Donnelly v Jackman 1970
Turner J considered the law of attempt: ‘He who sets out to commit a crime may in the event fall short of the complete commission of that crime for any one of a number of reasons. First, he may, of course, simply change his mind before committing . .
Cited – Regina v Rahman CACD 1985
False imprisonment is a common law offence, defined as consisting in ‘the unlawful and intentional or reckless restraint of a victim’s freedom of movement from a particular place. In other words it is unlawful detention which stops the victim moving . .
Cited – O’Loughlin v Chief Constable of Essex CA 12-Dec-1997
Police, when using force to enter premises, must still give their reasons for effecting their entry, to the occupant, unless this was impossible or undesirable.
Buxton LJ said: ‘This paragraph strictly speaking did not apply in the present . .
Cited – Regina v Jones; Regina v Nelson CACD 26-Mar-1999
Police officers have no power to use reasonable force, to compel a suspect to undergo an identification by confrontation. Powers generally phrased in the Act did not override an individual suspect’s rights. Beldam LJ said that the requirement that . .
Cited – Bentley v Brudzinski QBD 1982
A police officer arrived at a situation. Answering a signal from a colleague, he placed his hand on the shoulder of a man in order to attract his attention. The man the hit the officer and was charged with assaulting the officer in the execution of . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 18 July 2021; Ref: scu.189143

Norris v United States of America and others; (Goldshield Group plc intervening): Admn 25 Jan 2007

The defendant was the former chief executive of a company manufacturing carbon products internationally. His extradition to the US was sought on the basis that he had conspired in a dishonest price-fixing conspiracy.
Held: The secrecy of such an agreement was an adequate basis for an allegation of dishonesty at common law, and the extradition could proceed. The obstruction of justice charges, taken at their face value, were very grave indeed. The evidence was that, if Mr Norris were convicted, the conduct in question was likely to attract a sentence of between 21 and 27 months imprisonment. There was a possibility that the sentence will be significantly longer in order to reflect the gravity of the conduct that the obstruction of justice was designed to conceal.
Auld LJ, Field J
[2007] EWHC 71 (Admin), Times 07-Feb-2007, [2007] 1 WLR 1730, [2007] 2 All ER 29
Bailii
Extradition Act 2003 103
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Handyside v The United Kingdom ECHR 7-Dec-1976
The appellant had published a ‘Little Red Schoolbook’. He was convicted under the 1959 and 1964 Acts on the basis that the book was obscene, it tending to deprave and corrupt its target audience, children. The book claimed that it was intended to . .

Cited by:
Appeal from – 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 . .
See Also – Norris v Government of The United States of America and Another Admn 15-May-2009
. .
Cited – Norris v Government of United States of America SC 24-Feb-2010
The defendant faced extradition to the USA on charges of the obstruction of justice. He challenged the extradition on the basis that it would interfere with his article 8 rights to family life, given that the offence was merely ancillary, the result . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 17 July 2021; Ref: scu.248217

Sanambar v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 16 Jul 2021

This appeal concerns the effect of the European Convention on Human Rights (the ‘Convention’) on decisions to deport foreign nationals who lawfully settled in the UK as children and were subsequently convicted of serious criminal offences.
Lord Reed (President), Lord Hodge (Deputy President), Lord Sales, Lord Stephens, Sir Declan Morgan
[2021] UKSC 30
Bailii, Bailii Press Summary, Bailii Issues and Facts
England and Wales

Updated: 17 July 2021; Ref: scu.666004

A and B v Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority and Another: SC 9 Jul 2021

The Supreme Court is asked to decide whether excluding A and B, who are victims of human trafficking, from compensation under the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme unjustifiably discriminates against A and B, in breach of Article 14 taken with Article 4 of the European Convention on Human Rights
Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lady Arden, Lord Hamblen, Lord Burrows, Lord Stephens
[2021] UKSC 27
Bailii, Bailii Press Summary, Bailii Issues and Facts
England and Wales

Updated: 17 July 2021; Ref: scu.665998

Regina v Hudson: 1956

To avoid the payment of tax by positive false representations constitutes a fraud on the Crown and a fraud on the public. It is a common law offence and is indictable as such.
Lord Goddard CJ
[1956] 2 QB 252
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Rex v Bainbridge 1782
. .

Cited by:
Cited – Total Network Sl v Revenue and Customs HL 12-Mar-2008
The House was asked whether an action for unlawful means conspiracy was available against a participant in a missing trader intra-community, or carousel, fraud. The company appealed a finding of liability saying that the VAT Act and Regulations . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 July 2021; Ref: scu.268782

Smith v Hughes: QBD 1960

A prostitute offered her services from the balcony of a house.
Held: She was guilty of the offence of soliciting ‘in a street or public place’ contrary to section 1(1) of the 1959 Act. Applying the mischief rule, it could be seen that her solicitations took place in a ‘street or public place’ for the purposes of the Act.
Lord Parker said: ‘Observe that it does not say there specifically that the person who is doing the soliciting must be in the street. Equally it does not say that it is enough if the person who receives the solicitation or to whom it is addressed is in the street. For my part, I approach the matter by considering what is the mischief aimed at by this Act. Everybody knows that this was an Act intended to clean up the streets, to enable people to walk along the streets without being molested or solicited by common prostitutes. Viewed in that way, it can matter little whether the prostitute is soliciting while in the street or is standing in a doorway or on a balcony, or at a window, or whether the window is shut or open or half open; in each case her solicitation is projected to and addressed to somebody walking in the street. For my part, I am content to base my decision on that ground and that ground alone. I think that the magistrate came to a correct conclusion in each case, and that these appeals should be dismissed.’
Lord Parker
[1960] 2 All ER 859, [1960] 1 WLR 830
Street Offences Act 1959 1(1)
England and Wales

Updated: 15 July 2021; Ref: scu.200616

Foster, Regina v; Regina v Newman etc: CACD 30 Nov 2007

In each case the defendant appealed his conviction saying that since the defence which he ran included an admission of a lesser offence, the court should have left a conviction for that lesser offence as an alternative for the jury.
Held: The appeals failed. The case of Coutts did not create a duty on a judge always to leave a lesser verdict as an alternative for the jury. In particular that lesser offence might be disproportionate to the offence alleged. The judge did however have to ensure that the defence was left properly to the jury.
[2007] EWCA Crim 2869, Times 10-Dec-2007, [2008] 1 Cr App Rep 38, [2008] Crim LR 463, [2008] 2 All ER 597, [2008] 1 WLR 1615
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Coutts HL 19-Jul-2006
The defendant was convicted of murder. Evidence during the trial suggested a possibility of manslaughter, but neither the defence nor prosecution proposed the alternate verdict. The defendant now appealed saying that the judge had an independent . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 July 2021; Ref: scu.261639

Regina v C: CACD 9 Apr 2019

appeal against conviction – first, the application of the hearsay provisions in chapter 2 of Part 11 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (‘CJA 2003’); and secondly, the circumstances in which a Jury note may give rise to a decision to discharge them from returning verdicts.
Lord Justice Simon
[2019] EWCA Crim 623, [2019] WLR(D) 222, [2019] 1 WLR 5809
Bailii, WLRD
England and Wales

Updated: 15 July 2021; Ref: scu.637819

A, Regina v: CACD 1 Dec 2020

Appeal from conviction of murder – defence of self defence and judge’s refusal to admit evidence of deceased’s bad character.
[2020] EWCA Crim 1687
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 14 July 2021; Ref: scu.657269

Regina v Dee: 1884

Court of the Crown Cases Reserved of Ireland – May CJ (who had also been the trial judge), set out the facts: ‘There is not, I think, any doubt or dispute as to the facts and circumstances of the case. Upon the report of the Judge, who was myself, and the findings of the jury, it is, I think, established that Judith Gorman, wife of one J. Gorman, who was absent (having gone out to fish), lay down upon a bed in her sleeping room in the evening, when it was dark; that the prisoner came into the room, personating her husband, lay down upon her and had connexion with her; that she did not at first resist, believing the man to be her husband, but that, on discovering that he was not her husband, which was after the commencement but before the termination of the proceeding, her consent or acquiescence terminated, and she ran downstairs. It appeared, I think, manifestly that the prisoner knew the woman was deceived, as she said to the prisoner in his presence and hearing, when he came into the room, ‘You are soon home tonight,’ to which he made no reply. At the time my own opinion, founded upon well known cases in England, was that the prisoner was not guilty of rape, but at the request of the counsel for the Crown I left certain questions to the jury, and, upon their findings, directed them to find a verdict of guilty, reserving the case for consideration of the Court, which is now called upon to decide the question which arises.’
Held: It was the absence of consent, and not the fraud, which made the offence.
Palles CB said: ‘I think it follows that . . an act done under bona fide belief that it is another act different in its essence is not in law the act of the party. That is the present case a case which it is hardly necessary to point out is not that of consent in fact sought to be avoided for fraud, but one in which that which took place never amounted to consent. The person by whom the act was to be performed was part of its essence. The consent of the intellect, the only consent known to the law, was the act of the husband only, and of this the prisoner was aware.’
May CJ said: ‘Now, rape being defined to be sexual connexion with a woman without her consent, or without, and therefore against, her will, it is essential to consider what is meant and intended by consent. Does it mean an intelligent, positive concurrence of the will of the woman, or is the negative absence of dissent sufficient? In these surgical cases it is held that the submission to an act believed to be a surgical operation does not constitute consent to a sexual connexion, being of a wholly different character. This is no consensus quoad hoc. In the case of personation there is no consensus quoad hanc personam.’
May CJ and Palles CB
(1884) 14 Law Reports (Ireland), Common Law, 468, [1884] 14 LR Ir 468
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Linekar CACD 21-Oct-1994
L appealed against his conviction for rape. His victim was a woman working as a prostitute. He said that he had simply made off afterwards without payment. He was convicted on the basis that he had procured the act by a false pretence by him that he . .
Cited – Monica, Regina (on The Application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 14-Dec-2018
Deception as to identity did not undermine consent
The claimant had been an environmental campaigner. She had had a sexual relationship with a man who was unknown to her an undercover police officer. She now challenged the decision not to prosecute him for rape.
Held: Her claim failed. Case . .
Cited – Lawrance, Regina v CACD 23-Jul-2020
Consent not removed by Lie as to Vasectomy
The defendant appealed from his conviction of rape. He had represented to his victim that he had had a vasectomy to secure consent which the court found had been vitiated.
Held: The appeal was allowed. Could a lie about fertility negate . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 13 July 2021; Ref: scu.554812

L1 v Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 29 Jul 2013

The appellant regularly travelled between the UK and Sudan. The officials asked the Secretary of State to decide in principle to deprive him of his nationality the next time he was in Sudan and exclude him from the UK, in order to mitigate the risk of the appellant establishing himself in the UK to conduct terrorism-related activities. The Secretary of State made such a decision and a little later the appellant went to Sudan and the Secretary of State made a deprivation decision. The decision was challenged on the basis that it was made in bad faith in order to ensure an appeal could only be out of country and therefore more difficult.
Held: The Secretary of State was not prevented by the legislative scheme from taking steps which hampered the exercise of a right of an in-country appeal if that would or might damage national security.
Laws LJh
[2013] EWCA Civ 906
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
See Also – L1 v Secretary of State for The Home Department SIAC 4-Aug-2014
. .
Cited – Begum v Special Immigration Appeals Commission and Others CA 16-Jul-2020
Return To UK to fight Citizenship Withdrawal
The appellant had, as a 15 year old, left to go to Iraq to be the ISIL terrorist group. She married an ISIL fighter and they had three children, the last one dying. Her citizenship of the UK had been withdrawn by the respondent leaving an . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 13 July 2021; Ref: scu.513698

McNally v Regina: CACD 27 Jun 2013

A teenage woman impersonated a teenage man and secured the consent of another young woman on that basis to engage in digital penetrative activity.
Held: A victim’s consent to a sexual penetration might be destroyed by a defendant’s deception as to gender. Vitiating deceptions are not limited to deceptions relating to features of the offence.
Sir Brian Leveson P, giving the judgment of the court, concluded at para. 26 that the nature of the sexual act was ‘on any common-sense view, different where the complainant is deliberately deceived by the defendant into believing that the latter is male.’ The complainant ‘chose to have sexual encounters with a boy and her preference (her freedom whether or not to have a sexual encounter with a girl) was removed by the appellant’s deception.’
Leveson LJ, Kenneth Parker, Stewart JJ
[2013] EWCA Crim 1051, [2014] 1 QB 593, [2014] 2 WLR 200, [2013] 2 Cr App R 28, [2013] WLR(D) 256
Bailii, WLRD
Sexual Offences Act 2003 2
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Monica, Regina (on The Application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 14-Dec-2018
Deception as to identity did not undermine consent
The claimant had been an environmental campaigner. She had had a sexual relationship with a man who was unknown to her an undercover police officer. She now challenged the decision not to prosecute him for rape.
Held: Her claim failed. Case . .
Cited – Lawrance, Regina v CACD 23-Jul-2020
Consent not removed by Lie as to Vasectomy
The defendant appealed from his conviction of rape. He had represented to his victim that he had had a vasectomy to secure consent which the court found had been vitiated.
Held: The appeal was allowed. Could a lie about fertility negate . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 13 July 2021; Ref: scu.511219

Cope, Regina v: CACD 23 Jul 2020

Application for a very lengthy extension of time in which to apply for leave to appeal against conviction following refusal by the single judge – breach of a Sexual Harm Prevention Order
[2020] EWCA Crim 1086
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 13 July 2021; Ref: scu.656010

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 partner, but only on the basis that a condom was worn. He had not done so.
Held: Judicial review was granted: ‘What Assange underlines is that ‘choice’ is crucial to the issue of ‘consent’, and indeed we underline that the statutory definition of consent provided in s.74 applies equally to s.1(1)(c) as it does to s.1(1)(b). The evidence relating to ‘choice’ and the ‘freedom’ to make any particular choice must be approached in a broad commonsense way. If before penetration began the intervener had made up his mind that he would penetrate and ejaculate within the claimant’s vagina, or even, because ‘penetration is a continuing act from entry to withdrawal’ (see s.79(2) of the 2003 Act) he decided that he would not withdraw at all, just because he deemed the claimant subservient to his control, she was deprived of choice relating to the crucial feature on which her original consent to sexual intercourse was based. Accordingly her consent was negated. Contrary to her wishes, and knowing that she would not have consented, and did not consent to penetration or the continuation of penetration if she had any inkling of his intention, he deliberately ejaculated within her vagina. In law, this combination of circumstances falls within the statutory definition of rape.’
Sir John Thomas LCJ, Fulford, Sweeney JJ
[2013] EWHC 945 (Admin), [2013] 2 Cr App R 21, [2013] WLR(D) 178, [2014] 2 WLR 190, [2013] ACD 86, [2014] 1 QB 581
Bailii, WLRD
Sexual Offences Act 2003 1(1)
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Assange v Swedish Prosecution Authority Admn 2-Nov-2011
The defendant argued that he should not be extradited under a European Arest warrant to Sweden to face allegations of serious sexual assaults. He argued that the prosecutor requesting the extradition was not a judicial authority, that some offences . .

Cited by:
Cited – Monica, Regina (on The Application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 14-Dec-2018
Deception as to identity did not undermine consent
The claimant had been an environmental campaigner. She had had a sexual relationship with a man who was unknown to her an undercover police officer. She now challenged the decision not to prosecute him for rape.
Held: Her claim failed. Case . .
Cited – Lawrance, Regina v CACD 23-Jul-2020
Consent not removed by Lie as to Vasectomy
The defendant appealed from his conviction of rape. He had represented to his victim that he had had a vasectomy to secure consent which the court found had been vitiated.
Held: The appeal was allowed. Could a lie about fertility negate . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 July 2021; Ref: scu.472950

Assange v Swedish Prosecution Authority: Admn 2 Nov 2011

The defendant argued that he should not be extradited under a European Arest warrant to Sweden to face allegations of serious sexual assaults. He argued that the prosecutor requesting the extradition was not a judicial authority, that some offences did not satisfy the dual criminality rule, and that since the investigation was at an early stage, he was not yet an accused within the 2003 Act.
Held: The appeal failed. Although the EAW was issued by a prosecutor, the prosecutor was a judicial authority under the 2003 Act and Framework Decision. Mr Assange had been represented at a hearing of the Court of Appeal in Sweden, which had dismissed his appeal against the issuing an the arrest warrant. For a Framework Offence, dual criminality was not required, and ‘It is quite clear that the gravamen of the offence described is that Mr Assange had sexual intercourse with her without a condom and that she had only been prepared to consent to sexual intercourse with a condom. The description of the conduct makes clear that he consummated sexual intercourse when she was asleep and that she had insisted upon him wearing a condom . . it is difficult to see how a person could reasonably have believed in consent if the complaint alleges a state of sleep or half sleep, and secondly it avers that consent would not have been given without a condom. There is nothing in the statement from which it could be inferred that he reasonably expected that she would have consented to sex without a condom.’
Sir John Thomas thought that: ‘it is clear that in the present state of development of the common area for justice, mutual confidence in the common area for justice and the operation of the EAW will not be advanced unless the courts of the executing state scrutinise requests for surrender under the EAW with the intensity required by the circumstances of each case . .’
. . And: ‘Although the approach in Enander is one that will ordinarily apply, the designation under article 6 does not, in our view, always compel the recognition by another member state as conclusive, if the authority is self evidently not a judicial authority within the meaning of that broad term in the Framework Decision. It is of some interest to note in the light of our observation at para 37 on the status of a Ministry of Justice that in 2007 the Commissioner for Justice and Home Affairs in the Report on the Evaluation of the Transposition of the Framework Decision stated that the designation by some states directly or indirectly of the Ministry of Justice as a judicial authority was contrary to the terms of the Framework Decision. However there appear to have no instances where the Commission has taken action in respect of a body that should not have been designated as a judicial authority.
For example, if a warrant was issued by a Ministry of Justice which the member state had designated as an authority under article 6, it would not, in our view, be a valid EAW under the Framework Decision. The principles of mutual recognition and mutual confidence which underpin the common area for justice would not require the recognition of such a warrant, as it would self evidently not have been issued by a body which, on principles universally accepted in Europe, was judicial. In our view a national judge within the European Union is bound to uphold the principles of mutual recognition and mutual confidence for the reasons we have given at para 17; public confidence in the EAW would only be undermined by the recognition of an EAW issued by a Ministry of Justice in contradistinction to an EAW issued by a judge or prosecutor.
It was accepted by Miss Montgomery QC (who appeared for the prosecutor) that if circumstances arose where it could be said that the person issuing the EAW was not a judicial authority, the designating certificate issued by SOCA would not be conclusive. It would have to be challenged by judicial review. She was right to accept that the certificate was not conclusive, as under section 2(8) of the 2003 Act the function entrusted to SOCA is to certify that the issuing authority has the function of issuing EAWs. It does not certify that it is a judicial authority.’
Sir John Thomas P(QB)
[2011] EWHC 2849 (Admin)
Bailii, Judiciary
Extradition Act 2003
England and Wales
Citing:
At Magistrates Court – The judicial authority in Sweden v Assange 24-Feb-2011
(City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court – Sitting at Belmarsh Magistrates’ Court) The authority sought the extradition of the defendant to Sweden to face prosecution on allegations of sexual assaults. The defendant argued that the Act allowed . .
Cited – Regina v Linekar CACD 21-Oct-1994
L appealed against his conviction for rape. His victim was a woman working as a prostitute. He said that he had simply made off afterwards without payment. He was convicted on the basis that he had procured the act by a false pretence by him that he . .

Cited by:
Appeal from – 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 – Bucnys v Ministry of Justice SC 20-Nov-2013
The Court considered requests made by European Arrest Warrants for the surrender under Part 1 of the Extradition Act 2003 of three persons wanted to serve sentences imposed upon their conviction in other member states of the European Union. The . .
Cited – Monica, Regina (on The Application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 14-Dec-2018
Deception as to identity did not undermine consent
The claimant had been an environmental campaigner. She had had a sexual relationship with a man who was unknown to her an undercover police officer. She now challenged the decision not to prosecute him for rape.
Held: Her claim failed. Case . .
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 – Lawrance, Regina v CACD 23-Jul-2020
Consent not removed by Lie as to Vasectomy
The defendant appealed from his conviction of rape. He had represented to his victim that he had had a vasectomy to secure consent which the court found had been vitiated.
Held: The appeal was allowed. Could a lie about fertility negate . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 July 2021; Ref: scu.448098

Elbekkay, Regina v: CACD 12 Sep 1994

The defendant appealed against his conviction for rape. The victim had mistaken him man for her ‘boyfriend’
Held: it was rape for a man to have intercourse with a woman by impersonating her boyfriend with whom she had been living for 18 months. The 1885 Act ‘was limited to husbands because it was . . designed to resolve a particular confusion’.
McCowan LJ, Sachs, Mitchell JJ
[1994] EWCA Crim 1, [1995] Crim LR 163
Bailii
Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885 4
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Monica, Regina (on The Application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 14-Dec-2018
Deception as to identity did not undermine consent
The claimant had been an environmental campaigner. She had had a sexual relationship with a man who was unknown to her an undercover police officer. She now challenged the decision not to prosecute him for rape.
Held: Her claim failed. Case . .
Cited – Lawrance, Regina v CACD 23-Jul-2020
Consent not removed by Lie as to Vasectomy
The defendant appealed from his conviction of rape. He had represented to his victim that he had had a vasectomy to secure consent which the court found had been vitiated.
Held: The appeal was allowed. Could a lie about fertility negate . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 July 2021; Ref: scu.245680

EB, Regina v: CACD 16 Oct 2006

Appeal from conviction of rape. The appellant had not disclosed that he was HIV+ (although he did not represent that he did not have HIV).
Held: The appeal succeeded. Consent was not vitiated.
[2006] EWCA Crim 2945, [2007] 1 WLR 1567
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Lawrance, Regina v CACD 23-Jul-2020
Consent not removed by Lie as to Vasectomy
The defendant appealed from his conviction of rape. He had represented to his victim that he had had a vasectomy to secure consent which the court found had been vitiated.
Held: The appeal was allowed. Could a lie about fertility negate . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 July 2021; Ref: scu.270255

Macklin, Murphy, And Others’ Case: 1838

If several persons act together with a common intent, every act done by each of them in furtherance of that intent is done by all. If a deadly weapon be used an intention to kill is to be inferred – not so from a blow with a fist. From continued violence, after much beating, an intention to kill may be inferred.
[1838] EngR 176, (1838) 2 Lewin 225, (1838) 168 ER 1136 (A)
Commonlii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Jogee and Ruddock (Jamaica) v The Queen SC 18-Feb-2016
Joint Enterprise Murder
The two defendants appealed against their convictions (one in Jamaica) for murder, under the law of joint enterprise. Each had been an accessory when their accomplice killed a victim with a knife. The judge in Jogee had directed the jury that he . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 July 2021; Ref: scu.312182

Regina v Flattery: 1877

The victim of the rape alleged that she had agreed to a surgical procedure which she hoped would cure her fits.
Held: Denman J said: ‘There is one case where a woman does not consent to the act of connection and yet the man may not be guilty of rape, that is where the resistance is so slight and her behaviour such that the man may bona fide believe that she is consenting.’
Denman J
(1877) 13 Cox CC 388, (1877) 2 QB 410
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Morgan HL 30-Apr-1975
The defendants appealed against their convictions for rape, denying mens rea and asserting a belief (even if mistaken) that the victim had consented.
Held: For a defence of mistake to succeed, the mistake must have been honestly made and need . .
Cited – Regina v Linekar CACD 21-Oct-1994
L appealed against his conviction for rape. His victim was a woman working as a prostitute. He said that he had simply made off afterwards without payment. He was convicted on the basis that he had procured the act by a false pretence by him that he . .
Cited – Lawrance, Regina v CACD 23-Jul-2020
Consent not removed by Lie as to Vasectomy
The defendant appealed from his conviction of rape. He had represented to his victim that he had had a vasectomy to secure consent which the court found had been vitiated.
Held: The appeal was allowed. Could a lie about fertility negate . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 July 2021; Ref: scu.258683

Regina v Linekar: CACD 21 Oct 1994

L appealed against his conviction for rape. His victim was a woman working as a prostitute. He said that he had simply made off afterwards without payment. He was convicted on the basis that he had procured the act by a false pretence by him that he had a present intention of paying the 25 pounds.
Held: The appeal succeeded. ‘In rape, for consent to be vitiated by fraud, the deception must be either as to the nature of the act or as to identity. the prostitute here consented to sexual intercourse with the appellant. The reality of that consent is not destroyed by being induced by the appellant’s false pretence that his intention was to pay the agreed price of andpound;25 for her services. Therefore, he was not guilty of rape.
If anything, the appellant was guilty of an offence under section 3 of the 1956 Act which was not an alternative that was put to this jury.’
Swinton Thomas LJ, Morland, Steel JJ
Gazette 11-Jan-1995, Ind Summary 19-Dec-1994, Times 26-Oct-1994, [1994] EWCA Crim 2, [1995] 2 WLR 237, [1995] 2 CAR 49, [1995] 3 All ER 70, [1995] QB 250
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Rex v Joseph Jackson 1822
12 judges decided by 8 to 4 that carnal knowledge of a woman whilst she was under the belief that the man is her husband was not rape. . .
Cited – Regina v Barrow 1868
The defendant appealed aganst his conviction for rape.
Held: Bovill CJ said: ‘It does not appear that the woman, upon whom the offence was alleged to have been committed, was asleep or unconscious at the time when the act of connection . .
Cited – Regina v Flattery 1877
The victim of the rape alleged that she had agreed to a surgical procedure which she hoped would cure her fits.
Held: Denman J said: ‘There is one case where a woman does not consent to the act of connection and yet the man may not be guilty . .
Cited – Regina v Dee 1884
Court of the Crown Cases Reserved of Ireland – May CJ (who had also been the trial judge), set out the facts: ‘There is not, I think, any doubt or dispute as to the facts and circumstances of the case. Upon the report of the Judge, who was myself, . .
Cited – 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 – Rex v Williams 1923
The victim complained of rape, saying that she had agreed only to a physical manipulation by the defendant choir master which would provide her with extra air supply to improve her singing.
Held: The appeal failed. The victim had not consented . .
Cited – Papadimitropolus v Regina 1956
High Court of Australia. The rape complainant wrongly believed that she had gone through a marriage with the appellant.
Held: ‘Rape is carnal knowledge of a woman without her consent. Carnal knowledge is the physical act of penetration. It is . .
Cited – Olugboja, Regina v CACD 17-Jun-1981
The actus reus of the offence of rape was an act of sexual intercourse to which the complainant did not consent at the time it occurred. . .

Cited by:
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 – X City Council v MB and others; re MAB FD 13-Feb-2006
The adult patient was autistic. The doctors said that he lacked capacity, and the authority sought to prevent his return to Pakistan with, they thought, a view to being married. . .
Cited – Assange v Swedish Prosecution Authority Admn 2-Nov-2011
The defendant argued that he should not be extradited under a European Arest warrant to Sweden to face allegations of serious sexual assaults. He argued that the prosecutor requesting the extradition was not a judicial authority, that some offences . .
Cited – Monica, Regina (on The Application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 14-Dec-2018
Deception as to identity did not undermine consent
The claimant had been an environmental campaigner. She had had a sexual relationship with a man who was unknown to her an undercover police officer. She now challenged the decision not to prosecute him for rape.
Held: Her claim failed. Case . .
Cited – Lawrance, Regina v CACD 23-Jul-2020
Consent not removed by Lie as to Vasectomy
The defendant appealed from his conviction of rape. He had represented to his victim that he had had a vasectomy to secure consent which the court found had been vitiated.
Held: The appeal was allowed. Could a lie about fertility negate . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 July 2021; Ref: scu.87187

Regina v Shayler: CACD 29 Jul 2003

The defendant appealed against his conviction, saying the restrictions placed upon him in conducting his defence because the fact that he had been a member of the secret services, meant that he had been unable to conduct his defence properly, with witnesses giving evidence from behind screens, and documents being withheld.
Held: The appeal failed. Disclosures would have risked the safety of the individuals involved and national security: ‘the judge was careful to evaluate and to give weight to any possible prejudice, and the cross-examination by the applicant was only restricted in accordance with well established principle and to the extent that it would have been restricted if the applicant had been represented by counsel. As we have indicated, we see no reason to conclude that the judge failed to have regard to the cumulative effect of his decisions, and we reject the contention that the regime which he imposed was disproportionate. Indeed, as we have demonstrated, the rulings he made only went as far in the circumstances they had to go. ‘
Lord Justice Kennedy Mr Justice Bennett Mr Justice Cresswell
[2003] EWCA Crim 2218
Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights 6, Official Secrets Act 1920 8(4), Official Secrets Act 1989 11(4), Crown Court Rules 1982 24A
England and Wales
Citing:
See also – Regina v Shayler HL 21-Mar-2002
The defendant had been a member of the security services. On becoming employed, and upon leaving, he had agreed to keep secret those matters disclosed to him. He had broken those agreements and was being prosecuted. He sought a decision that the . .
See also – Regina v Shayler CACD 28-Sep-2001
Duress as Defence not closely Defined
The defendant had been a member of MI5. He had signed the Official Secrets Act, but then disclosed various matters, including material obtained by interceptions under the Interception of Communications Act. He claimed that his disclosures were made . .
Cited – Regina v Wakely 7-Jun-1990
(High Court of Australia) The defendants appealed against their convictions, saying that their cross examinations had been improperly restricted by the judge at trial.
Held: The court considered the limit of permissible cross-examination. . .

Cited by:
See also – Regina v Shayler HL 21-Mar-2002
The defendant had been a member of the security services. On becoming employed, and upon leaving, he had agreed to keep secret those matters disclosed to him. He had broken those agreements and was being prosecuted. He sought a decision that the . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 July 2021; Ref: scu.184857

Saeed Mustapha Nur v Regina: CACD 30 Jun 2003

The applicant renewed his application for leave to appeal out of time against his conviction for murder. He was variously represented by different firms of solicitors and unrepresented, which accounted for some delay. He claimed to have returned the first form in time, but it was never recorded at the court as received.
Held: Even treating the first notice as having been received, the subsequent additional delay would have led the appeal to be treated as abandoned. Even so, examining the grounds of the appeal there were insufficient merits disclosed to justify exercise of any discretion. Leave refused.
Lord Justice Mance Mr Justice Mackay The Recorder Of Birmingham
1996/4184/X4, [2003] EWCA Crim 1843
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 12 July 2021; Ref: scu.184033

Interfact Ltd and Another v Liverpool City Council: Admn 23 May 2005

The defendants, operators of licensed sex shops, appealed convictions for offences under the Act. The shops had supplied videos rated R*18 by mail order from the shops. The Trading Standards Officer said this did not satisfy the requirement that such films be supplied only in a licensed sex shop. The district judge had held that supply in this context meant the direct hand to hand transfer of the video within the shop.
Held: The shops’ appeals failed. The court would not draw fine distinctions. The purpose of the Act was to prevent unlawful distribution of such material: ‘the requirement that the event of supply is to be confined to a licensed sex shop gives heightened protection, reducing the opportunity for the material to be viewed by children. ‘ and ‘the ambit of the restriction on supply in section 7(2)(c) should be interpreted with a view to that purpose being achieved. It seems plain to us that the restriction, requiring that a video work is not to be supplied other than in a licensed sex shop, is designed to eliminate a range of circumstances carrying the risk that such material might come to be viewed by persons under 18 . . ‘ It was submitted that the restriction on distribution would inhibit the defendants’ rights of free expression.
Maurice Kay LJ, Newman J
[2005] EWHC 995 (Admin), Times 31-May-2005, [2005] 1 WLR 3118
Bailii
Video Recordings Act 1984 12(1)
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Rees v Munday QBD 1974
The defendant advertised in a motor trade journal, to sell a vehicle, which was ‘in first class condition throughout.’ In the same advertisement was the reference to it being of ’12 yard’ capacity.’ The Act applied differently according to whether a . .
Cited – Regina v Delgado CACD 1984
The court considered the meaning of ‘supply’ under the 1971 Act: ‘Thus we are driven back to considering the word ‘supply’ in its context. The judge himself relied upon the dictionary definition, which is a fairly wide one. This court has been . .
Cited – Regina v Maginnis HL 5-Mar-1987
M was stopped by the police. They found cannabis in his car. He said he was looking after it for a friend. He was accused of intending to supply it.
Held: ‘The word ‘supply’ in its ordinary natural meaning conveys the idea of furnishing or . .
Cited – Tesco Stores Ltd v Brent London Borough Council QBD 16-Feb-1993
An employee’s actual knowledge of and information about the age of a video purchaser could properly be imputed to his employer company. . .
Cited – Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza HL 21-Jun-2004
Same Sex Partner Entitled to tenancy Succession
The protected tenant had died. His same-sex partner sought a statutory inheritance of the tenancy.
Held: His appeal succeeded. The Fitzpatrick case referred to the position before the 1998 Act: ‘Discriminatory law undermines the rule of law . .
Cited – Zana v Turkey ECHR 25-Nov-1997
Turkey – prison sentence imposed by Diyarbakir National Security Court on account of a statement to journalists (Articles 168 and 312 of the Criminal Code) – accused unable to appear at hearing in that court (Article 226 – 4 of the Code of Criminal . .
Cited – Handyside v The United Kingdom ECHR 7-Dec-1976
The appellant had published a ‘Little Red Schoolbook’. He was convicted under the 1959 and 1964 Acts on the basis that the book was obscene, it tending to deprave and corrupt its target audience, children. The book claimed that it was intended to . .
Cited – Wingrove v The United Kingdom ECHR 25-Nov-1996
The applicant had been refused a certification certificate for his video ‘Visions of Ecstasy’ on the basis that it infringed the criminal law of blasphemy. The Court found that the offence was prescribed by law and served the legitimate aim of . .
Cited – Regina v Northallerton Magistrates, ex parte Dove QBD 17-Jun-1999
The defendant having provided sufficient evidence of his means, a court awarding prosecution costs, where the other penalty is a fine, should not allow these to be completely disproportionate to the fine. Where a defendant failed to provide . .

Cited by:
See Also – Interfact Ltd v Liverpool City Council Admn 29-Jun-2010
The claimant had been convicted in 2005 of an offence under the 1984 Act. It later became clear that the Act failed properly to implement a European Directive and was unenforceable. The company now sought leave to appeal out of time. The case was . .
Cited – Regina v Budimir and Another CACD 29-Jun-2010
The defendants sought leave to appeal out of time saying that their convictions had been under the 1984 Act which was later found to have been unenforceable for failure to comply with notification requirements under European law. The 1984 Act had . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 11 July 2021; Ref: scu.225184

Plaza, R v: CACD 13 Mar 2013

Appeal from conviction of conspiracy to supply a class A drug – the judge was wrong to allow the prosecution to put in evidence his conviction in the Netherlands and that as a result his conviction is unsafe.
Held: The appeal failed: ‘The judge dealt with the Dutch conviction in an entirely appropriate manner in his summing-up. He made it clear to the jury that they had to be sure that the appellant had in fact committed the offence before they could take it into consideration at all. He also explained its potential relevance to the issues of innocent association and propensity while making it clear that whether the conviction did in fact assist on either of those questions was entirely a matter for them.’
[2013] EWCA Crim 501
Bailii
Criminal Justice Act 2003 101(3), Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 78
England and Wales

Updated: 10 July 2021; Ref: scu.510711

F, Regina v: CACD 14 Mar 2013

The prosecutor appealed a decision that its child witness was incompetent to give evidence in criminal proceedings. The defendant said that the prosecution had failed to meet the requirement to give notice immediately after the ruling.
Held: The requirement arose on the formal giving of the decision, and not at an earlier point where the judge had indicated by email that that was what he would be doing.
Treacy LJ, Saunders J, Judge Milford QC
[2013] EWCA Crim R1, [2013] WLR(D) 100
Bailii, WLRD
Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 53(3)
England and Wales

Updated: 09 July 2021; Ref: scu.471956

X2 (Preliminary Issue : Substantive): SIAC 18 Apr 2018

The Commission considered whether the deprivation of citizenship decision breached the Secretary of State’s practice or policy.
Held: Sections 78 and 92 of the Immigration Nationality and Asylum Act 2002 (preventing removal while an appeal is pending and rights of appeal exercisable in country) do not apply to appeals under section 40A of the BNA so that Parliament did not intend that an appeal under section 40A was only exercisable in-country or exercisable in-country in certain types of case or that such an appeal should be a bar to removal. SIAC concluded: ‘Parliament clearly anticipated that such appeals [under section 40A of the BNA] would often, if not regularly, be brought from outside the UK. Once that is recognised, it seems to us to follow that Parliament must also be taken to have recognised that such appeals would be brought by appellants whose circumstances outside the UK would vary in many different respects, and that some, at least, would, or might, face significant restrictions, depending on where they are when they appeal, on their ability to take part in their appeals . . It is striking, we consider, that Parliament has not stipulated that the Secretary of State should take any steps to make it easier for such appellants to exercise their right of appeal. Nor has Parliament stipulated that the ability of an appellant effectively to exercise her right of appeal should have any bearing on the fate of the appeal.’
SIAC said that what the Secretary of State was required to assess in order to comply with his stated practice was: ‘that the risks which the Home Secretary is required to assess are risks of harm which would breach articles 2 or 3 of the ECHR (if they applied) that are a direct consequence of the decision to deprive. SIAC described a two-stage test which it drew from the case law of the European Court of Human Rights: (i) a test of ‘direct consequence’ as the criterion for establishing state responsibility, liability being incurred if a state takes action which as a direct consequence exposes the individual to the relevant risk; and (ii) a test of ‘foreseeability’ as the criterion for establishing whether there are substantial grounds for believing the individual would be exposed to the relevant risk. The risk must be both foreseeable and a direct consequence of the deprivation.’
Under the heading ‘Syria’ it stated: ‘A UK-linked individual who has been deprived of his/her British nationality is likely to receive broadly the same treatment (for better or worse) as an individual who retains British nationality; although speculative it is possible that, at some point in the future, British nationals will be treated differently, insofar as arrangements may be made to return some individuals to the UK.’
Under the heading ‘Bangladesh: Risk of mistreatment in Bangladesh and relevance of deprivation’ it is stated: ‘It is not possible to speculate what will happen to women in refugee and IDP camps, whether or not they are suspected of being ISIL-linked. We do not consider that a repatriation to Bangladesh is a foreseeable outcome of deprivation and as such the Home Secretary may consider that there is no real risk of return-let alone of mistreatment on return-for the purpose of complying with his practice. However, for completeness we consider those risks here.
Open source reporting indicates that there is a real risk that individuals in Bangladesh could be subject to conditions which would not comply with the ECHR; there is some media reporting to suggest that the Bangladeshi authorities may have carried out extra-judicial killings . . of detainees and other enemies of the state.’
[2018] UKSIAC 1-SC- 132-2016
Bailii
Immigration Nationality and Asylum Act 2002 78 92
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Begum v Special Immigration Appeals Commission and Others CA 16-Jul-2020
Return To UK to fight Citizenship Withdrawal
The appellant had, as a 15 year old, left to go to Iraq to be the ISIL terrorist group. She married an ISIL fighter and they had three children, the last one dying. Her citizenship of the UK had been withdrawn by the respondent leaving an . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 08 July 2021; Ref: scu.622627

G1 v Secretary of State for The Home Department (Deportation – Preliminary Issue – Refused): SIAC 24 Oct 2013

[2013] UKSIAC 96/2010)
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Begum v Special Immigration Appeals Commission and Others CA 16-Jul-2020
Return To UK to fight Citizenship Withdrawal
The appellant had, as a 15 year old, left to go to Iraq to be the ISIL terrorist group. She married an ISIL fighter and they had three children, the last one dying. Her citizenship of the UK had been withdrawn by the respondent leaving an . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 05 July 2021; Ref: scu.520732