Interim application in ongoing receivership proceedings for recovery of assets that are the subject of a confiscation order in the Crown Court. The applicant, who was not the defendant in the criminal proceedings, applies for the discharge or variation of a restraint order.
Farbey DBE J
[2019] EWHC 2574 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 27 August 2022; Ref: scu.642686
Well drafted grounds of appeal and concise outlines of argument would greatly assist the judge considering whether to grant leave. Practitioners were required to summarise the facts and outline their arguments concisely. Well drafted grounds of appeal assisted the single judge when considering leave and served to shorten any hearing before the full court. Ill prepared and prolix documents necessarily led to wasted time spent on preparation and unnecessarily protracted hearings.
Times 16-Oct-2008, CA 08-Oct-2008
England and Wales
Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.280412
The defendant appealed his conviction, sayig that a witness having turned hostile, the judge should have more clearly warned the jury about the value of his evidence.
Held: The appeal failed, though the judge should have given a stronger warning. The exact direction to be given will vary according to the circumstances of the particular case.
Lord Justice Scott Baker, Mr Justice McCombe and Mr Justice Mackay
Times 28-Oct-2009
England and Wales
Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.377313
One of several defendants became mentally unfit to continue during the course of the trial.
Held: There was nothing in the rules to prevent the court continuing with the trial as against all defendants, though in the case of the unfit defendant, the jury would be asked only as to whether he had committed the acts of which he was accused, and not as to his intentions.
Lord Justice Toulson, Mr Justice Andrew Smith and Mr Justice Bean
England and Wales
Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.279931
The defendant had been acquitted. The Director of Public prosecutions announced that new and compelling evidence had come to light and a retrial was ordered. The defendant objected that the publicity surrounding the Director’s publicity release was prejudicial to his right to a fair trial. The Director now sought an order restricting publicity around the trial.
Held: Such publicity announcements should be avoided in future, but the publicity was insufficient to make a new trial unfair in this case. The provisions of the 2003 Act as to publicity were wider than those of the 1981 Act, and an order should be granted.
Times 06-Mar-2006, [2006] 1WLR 1998
Criminal Justice Act 2003, Contempt of Court Act 1981 4(2)
England and Wales
Cited – HM Attorney General v MGN Ltd and Another Admn 29-Jul-2011
The police arrested a man on suspicion of the murder of a young woman. He was later released and exonerated, and a second man arrested and later convicted. Whilst the first was in custody the two defendant newspapers, the Daily Mirror and the Sun . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.240164
The defendant appealed his conviction saying that the prosecution should have been stayed permanently because of the delay in bringing the case. He had been sentenced to 7 years imprisonment for sexual assaults committed in the 1970s.
Held: A permanent stay should be exceptional. It was an exercise of judicial assessment based upon experience rather than any conclusion as to the facts. Even where there had no fault on the part of the defendant a permanent stay should be exceptional. No stay should be granted in the absence of serious prejudice to the defendant so that no fair trial remained possible. In making that assessment, the court should allow for its own powers to limit the admission of evidence. If having considered those factors a fair trial remained impossible, a stay should be granted. The conviction was safe.
Rose LJ, Stanley Burnton, Hedley J
Times 29-Mar-2006
England and Wales
Cited – Attorney General’s Reference (No 1 of 1990) CACD 3-Jun-1992
The jurisdiction to stay criminal proceedings on the ground of delay is exceptional, even where the delay was unjustifiable, and a stay should rarely be imposed in the absence of any fault on the part of the complainant or prosecution, and should . .
Cited – Attorney General’s Reference (No 2 of 2001) CACD 12-Jul-2001
When assessing whether the defendant’s right to a trial within a reasonable time had been infringed, the court should look as from the date at which he was charged, or served with a summons, and not from the date of the first interview. Although a . .
Cited – Regina v Smolinksi CACD 2004
. .
Cited – Regina v Hooper CACD 2003
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.240320
The defendant had given no answers during his police interview, but instead his solicitor read out a full written statement of his case. At trial, he did not depart from the statement thus provided. He appealed after the judge allowed the jury to make adverse inferences from his silence, on the basis that it had prevented the police testing his statement on interview.
Held: The section was directed to ensuring the early disclosure of a suspect’s case, not to provide for it to be tested. An inference should not have been permitted.
Laws, LJ, Mitting, Rivlin QC, JJ
Times 20-Aug-2003, Gazette 02-Oct-2003, [2003] EWCA Crim 1977
Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 34(1)(a)
England and Wales
Confirmed – Howell v Regina CACD 17-Jan-2003
The court set down the general approach to be taken where a suspect refused to answer questions put during his interview by the police. . .
Cited – Beckles, Regina v CACD 12-Nov-2004
The appellant had been convicted in 1997 of robbery and false imprisonment. His case was now refererred by the Criminal Cases Review Commission. The defendant had, on advice from his solicitor refused to answer questions at the police station. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.185748
The court retains a common law power to adjourn part of its sentencing procedure. Courts should exercise considerable restraint in their interventions.
Rose LJ
[2000] 2 All ER 872, [2000] 2 Cr App R 361
England and Wales
Cited – Regina v Jones (Timothy) CACD 23-May-2003
The court had delayed part of the sentencing procedure to fix a compensation order. However if it did so, it should state clearly the reasons for the postponement, and what sentence was to be considered at the adjourned hearing. In this case a . .
Cited – Gianchand Jahree v The State PC 28-Feb-2005
(Mauritius) The defendant appealed his conviction for possession of counterfeit bank notes, saying he had been unrepresented throughout, and that the magistrate had intervened in the character of a prosecutor.
Held: The right to representation . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.183271
At trial, the jury had sought assistance from the judge as to how certain they had to be. He replied they had to be at least sure, and explained this was a slightly lower standard than certainty. The defendant appealed.
Held: Judges should not seek to make any such distinction. It was unhelpful, and contrary to guidance in Archbold. Appeal dismissed for other reasons.
Lord Justice Keene, Mr Justice Davis and Judge John Griffith Williams, QC
Times 27-Jun-2002
England and Wales
Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.174085
Yoldas was charged with belonging to an illegal organisation. He had been informed of his rights by the public prosecutor and by the judge who placed him on remand. He signed a form saying that he had the right to appoint a legal representative who could be present when his statement was taken, and that he could benefit from the legal assistance of a legal representative appointed by the bar association if he was not in a position to appoint one. He stated that he understood his rights but that he did not wish to be assisted a lawyer.
Held: Recalling Salduz, the Court said that, to be effective any waiver of the right to take part in the trial must be established unequivocally and be surrounded by a minimum of guarantees as to its seriousness. Applying those principles to the facts of the case it noted that he had been reminded of his right to legal assistance, that he refused it and that it clearly emerged from his statements taken whilst in custody that his decision to waive his right to legal assistance was freely and voluntarily made: ‘Hence, the applicant’s waiver of this right was unequivocal and surrounded by a minimum guarantee.’
[2010] ECHR 1 620, 27503/04
European Convention on Human Rights
Cited – McGowan (Procurator Fiscal) v B SC 23-Nov-2011
The appellant complained that after arrest, though he had been advised of his right to legal advice, and had declined the offer, it was still wrong to have his subsequent interview relied upon at his trial.
Held: It was not incompatible with . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.425749
ECJ The applicant, suspected of involvement in an assault on a man by two hooded individuals in the underground car park of a Parisian residential block, was placed in custody in the context of a request for evidence on commission. In accordance with Article 153 of the Code of Criminal Procedure applicable to the facts of the case, while being examined as a witness, he was asked to swear an oath. At the end of his custody, ordered in accordance with the provisions of Article 154 of the Code, he was placed under investigation on the charge of abetting an attempted murder. By a decision which became final in 2006, he was sentenced to five years of imprisonment, with one year suspended, for having ‘abetted the offence of deliberate violence causing more than eight days’ total incapacity for work, which L.E. and F.G. committed in collusion, with premeditation and with the use of a weapon, by giving the culprits instructions to commit the offence, in this instance by asking them to beat up and put pressure on a man whose identifying features he supplied’.
The European Court found that when placed in custody and obliged to swear an oath to tell the truth, the applicant was on a criminal charge and therefore enjoyed the right not to assist in his own incrimination and to remain silent. It concluded that paragraphs 1 and 3 of Article 6 of the Convention had been infringed.
Peer Lorenzen, President
1466/07, [2010] ECHR 1 621
European Convention on Human Rights
Cited – Ambrose v Harris, Procurator Fiscal, Oban, etc SC 6-Oct-2011
(Scotland) The appellant had variously been convicted in reliance on evidence gathered at different stages before arrest, but in each case without being informed of any right to see a solicitor. The court was asked, as a devolution issue, at what . .
See Also – Brusco v France ECHR 2-Dec-2011
Declaration as to execution of judgment . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.425756
(Court of Appeal of Jamaica) The defendant had been convicted of murder and his applications for leave to appeal against conviction were refused. He applied to the Privy Council for special leave to appeal from a decision of the Court of Appeal of Jamaica ‘on appeal from a court of Jamaica’.
Held: Special leave could be granted where the appellate courts of the local jurisdiction had refused to entertain any appeal against the decision or conviction in respect of which special leave to appeal was sought.
Lord Mance, gave the judgment of the Board, saying that the question was whether the Lane v Esdaile principle applied to the interpretation of the statutory provisions under consideration.
There was no trace of any such rule having been routinely applied to the statutory provisions which governed the grant of special leave to appeal. Secondly, the statutory provisions contemplated that special leave may be given in respect of a decision or order of a first instance court. Thirdly, the provisions ‘affirmed and regulated’ in statutory form the former royal prerogative which itself could not ‘be restricted or qualified save by express words or by necessary intendment’.
He concluded that the combination of these points was ‘decisive’: There is nothing clearly or necessarily to restrict the broad language reflecting the royal prerogative power to grant special leave now enacted in statutory form in section 3 of the 1844 Act and section 44 of the 1833 Act. The breadth of the prerogative power, now statutorily expressed, and the very varied contexts in which it applies militate against the recognition or introduction of any formal limitation upon section 3 and section 1 paralleling the rule in Lane v Esdaile. The Board concludes therefore that the rule in Lane v Esdaile is not applicable on any application made for special leave to the Privy Council itself.’
Lord Rodger, Lady Hale, Lord Brown, Lord Mance, Lord Kerr
[2010] UKPC 26, [2011] 2 AC 79, [2011] 2 WLR 983
Cited – Lane v Esdaile HL 5-May-1891
The court considered the extent of the House’s jurisdiction as an appellate court. Section 3 of the 1876 Act provided that an appeal should lie to the House of Lords from ‘any order or judgment of . . Her Majesty’s Court of Appeal in England’. The . .
Cited – Sarfraz v Disclosure and Barring Service CA 22-May-2015
The claimant appealed against the refusal of the defendant to remove his name from the list of those barred from working with children. He had been a GP. Though not priosecuted for any criminal offence the Professional Conduct Committee had found . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.425748
[2010] ScotSC 2
England and Wales
Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.425542
Each defendant appealed saying that being themselves the victims of people trafficking, the prosecutions had failed to take into account its obligations under the Convention.
Held: Prosecutors had ‘a three-stage exercise of judgment. The first is: (1) is there a reason to believe that the person has been trafficked? If so, then (2) if there is clear evidence of a credible common law defence the case will be discontinued in the ordinary way on evidential grounds, but, importantly, (3) even where there is not, but the offence may have been committed as a result of compulsion arising from the trafficking, prosecutors should consider whether the public interest lies in proceeding to prosecute or not.’ Whilst it was not the case that victims of trafficking should nbever be prosecuted, in this case the prosecution had been wrong. At the time of the decision to prosecute they had been seen as having moved from being victims to being exploiters, but the CPS had failed to re-assess this view when at a later stage that view had been dropped.
Hughes VP LJ, Owen, Thirlwall JJ
[2010] EWCA Crim 2327, [2011] 1 Cr App R 135, [2011] Crim LR 425, [2011] 1 Cr App R 12
Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings 2005
England and Wales
Cited – O, Regina v CACD 2-Sep-2008
The defendant agirl in her mid teens, appealed against her conviction for carrying a false identity card.
Held: The appeal was not opposed. The United Kingdom having signed the Convention on Action against People Trafficking was bound to . .
Cited – Rantsev v Cyprus And Russia ECHR 7-Jan-2010
A Russian woman, aged 20, had gone to work as an artiste in a cabaret in Cyprus. Three weeks later she was found dead in a street.
Held: The Court upheld her father’s complaint that Cyprus was in breach of article 4 in that its regime for the . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Mohammed Hussain Ahmed and Idris Ibrahim Patel Admn 27-Apr-1998
The ratification by the government of a Treaty may create a legitimate expectation that its terms will be applied in dealing with an individual affected by it. (Woolf) ‘I will accept that the entering into a treaty by the Secretary of State could . .
Cited – Regina v Fregenet Asfaw HL 21-May-2008
The House considered the point of law: ‘If a defendant is charged with an offence not specified in section 31(3) of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999, to what extent is he entitled to rely on the protections afforded by article 31 of the 1951 . .
Cited – Regina v Uxbridge Magistrates and Another ex parte Adimi; R v CPS ex parte Sorani; R v SSHD and Another ex parte Kaziu Admn 29-Jul-1999
The three asylum seeker appellants arrived in the United Kingdom at different times in possession of false passports. They were prosecuted for possession or use of false documents contrary to section 5, and for obtaining air services by deception . .
Cited – E and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 10-Jun-2011
Judicial review was sought of a decision by the respondent to prosecute a child for her alleged sexual abuse of her younger sisters. Agencies other than the police and CPS considered that a prosecution would harm both the applicant and her sisters. . .
Cited – N, Regina v CACD 20-Feb-2012
The court considered the offence of child trafficking. The defendants had been the victims of such offences and used for managing cannabis production. It was argued that neither defendant should have been prosecuted.
Held: The appeals failed. . .
Cited – Hounga v Allen and Another SC 30-Jul-2014
The appellant, of Nigerian origin had been brought here at the age of 14 with false identity papers, and was put to work caring for the respondent’s children. In 2008 she was dismissed and ejected from the house. She brought proceedings alleging . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.425379
The defendant appealed against a refusal by the magistrates to allow him to re-open his mode of trial hearing so as to allow him to elect trial at the Crown Court. She was Iranian and non-English speaker, though with a translator. The magistrates had found that she had understood the nature and consequences of the decision she made.
May LJ, Harrison J
[2004] EWHC 45 (Admin)
Magistrates’ Court Act 1980 17 18
England and Wales
Cited – Regina v Craske, ex parte Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis QBD 1957
The court has discretion to permit a defendant a change of election for trial. Devlin J said: ‘I do not think that means that once the procedure is set in motion, the court has ineluctably to allow the wheels to revolve without any power to stop . .
Cited – Regina v Southampton Justices, ex parte Briggs QBD 1972
Lord Widgery CJ, with whom Ashworth and Griffiths JJ agreed, stated that, in determining a request by a defendant to withdraw consent to summary jurisdiction, the justices should exercise their jurisdiction ‘on how they see the broad justice of the . .
Cited – Regina v Birmingham Justices, ex parte Hodgson 1985
McCullough J said that a defendant must ‘understand the nature and significance’ of his choice of venue for his trial. The central factor was the state of mind of the defendant at the time he made his election: ‘Did he properly understand the nature . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.425317
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder saying that since part of the trial had been in camera the result was unsafe.
Held: The appeal failed. The Court addressed submissions advanced on his behalf indicating how substantially the essence of the appellant’s case was in fact publicly disclosed: ‘He [Mr Robertson] contends that if the evidence which was taken in private, which consisted of four witnesses plus that of the defendant, had been heard in public, there would have been likely to be significantly greater media coverage of the trial, and that there is a real possibility that additional witnesses supporting the defendant in his case would have come forward on seeing it. In particular, he suggests that there is a real possibility that witnesses would have come forward to confirm the existence and gangster characteristics of those whom the defendant blamed for the supply to him of the deceased’s cheques, credit card and banking information. Secondly, he says, there may well have been further evidence of the essentially good and non-violent past character of the defendant.
This possibility was considered carefully at the time of the decision to conduct part of the case in camera. We are unable to see that it can be more than the merest speculation. Most of the trial was conducted in public. The defendant was able to name the three persons who he said were responsible for the supply of the cheques and to give a good deal of circumstantial identifying material. The order for the taking of evidence in private had excluded that part of his evidence, expressly so that it could be heard by anyone who chose to be in court, but the defendant when he came to give evidence was unable to confine himself even for a brief period to this kind of material and so it was in the end necessary for all his evidence to be taken in private. Nevertheless, the information about the alleged gangsters was available to be put to several Crown witnesses who gave evidence in open court, including the officer in the case who was cross-examined about them and about what efforts had been made to trace them. Moreover, at the first trial counsel for the defendant had made an opening statement after the Crown opening – in public – and had had the opportunity, taken as we understand it, to identify the persons on whom, on the defendant’s case, the defence turned. At the second trial a similar statement could no doubt have been made, but as a matter of trial strategy no request to do so was made. The existence of Aming [Ah Ming] was confirmed by at least one witness and other information about him was elicited. The defendant was also able to advance, in open court, a number of allegations against a prosecution witness, He Jia Jin, and to put before the jury material which suggested, perhaps without much in the way of proof but advantageously so to the defendant, that that man similarly participated in nefarious activities. This all happened twice, in two trials a year or so apart. We are unable to accept that there is a real possibility that other evidence would have emerged given further publicity and that such would have been exculpatory. In reaching that conclusion we have taken into account the enormously strong evidence, summarised below, that the defendant’s account of being involved only in very limited use of the deceased’s identity and bank accounts at the behest of others, was simply not true.
Insofar as Mr Robertson suggested that further material might also have emerged on which to cross-examine the few witnesses who gave evidence in private this was not made out. The kind of material to which he referred was available at the time and no attempt was made to deploy it.
The suggestion that additional good character evidence might also have emerged is similarly unarguable. There was a great deal of evidence of the defendant’s character, both praiseworthy and non-violent on the one hand and less good, involving a history of forgery and dishonesty, on the other. The judge summed it up very favourably to the defendant.’
Hughes LJ VP CACD, Saunders, Thirlwell JJ
[2010] EWCA Crim 2072
England and Wales
Cited – A and Others, Regina v; Regina v The Crown Court at the Central Criminal Court ex parte A Times Newspapers Ltd etc CACD 13-Jan-2006
The defendant was to be charged with offences associated with terrorism. He had sought stay of the trial as an abuse of process saying that he had been tortured by English US and Pakistani authorities. The judge made an order as to what parts of the . .
See Also – Yam, Regina v CACD 28-Jan-2008
An order had been made for the trial of the defendant on a charge of murder to be held excluding both press and public. The Order had been made in the interests of national security and for the protection of the identity of a witness or other . .
See Also – Yam v Attorney General Misc 27-Feb-2014
Central Criminal Court . .
Cited – Wang Yam, Regina (on The Application of) v Central Criminal Court and Another SC 16-Dec-2015
The appellant was to apply to the ECHR challenge the fairness of his trial because it was held partially in camera. The UK resisted this application. The appellant sought to be permitted in his response to disclose and refer to contents of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.424866
The defendant appealed against his conviction for having shot a deer. He said that the District Judge should have ruled that he had no case to answer. He was said to have been one of three youths cruelly killing a fawn.
Held: There had been sufficient evidence before the district judge to open the possibility of a conviction, and, applying Galbraith, the submission of no cae to answer had been correctly rejected.
Elias LJ, Keith J
[2010] EWHC 1301 (Admin)
Cited – Regina v Galbraith CCA 1981
Rejection of Submission of No Case to Answer
The defendant had faced a charge of affray. The court having rejected his submission of having no case to answer, he had made an exculpatory statement from the dock. He appealed against his conviction.
Held: Lord Lane LCJ said: ‘How then . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 24 August 2022; Ref: scu.424776
Appeal by way of case stated which raises the question as to whether it was lawful for the magistrates sitting at the Medway Court on 30th November 2009 to dismiss two summonses alleging a failure to notify the Ports Authority for the purposes of obtaining pilotage. The magistrates dismissed the summonses on the basis that no one had appeared on behalf of the prosecution to prosecute the case against a ship captained by Captain Fincken, and named the Rainbow Warrior.
Moses LJ, Wyn Williams J
[2010] EWHC 2229 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 24 August 2022; Ref: scu.424077
Challenge to magistrate’s decision to refuse adjournment of trial. The defendant had a medial evidence to say he suffered food poisoning, but was not in the correct form.
Held: The district judge had failed to apply the case of Jones. The case was remitted for hearing by a differently constituted court.
Andrews DBE J
[2018] EWHC 3278 (Admin)
Magistrates Court Act 1980 142
England and Wales
Updated: 23 August 2022; Ref: scu.631197
The defendant had been granted a defendant costs order, but he had not complied with the Rules by first outlining the type of costs and amount claimed’ and the Court had not required compliance. He had successfully appealed against a conviction for supplying counterfeit Viagra. The proceedings had been very complex and protracted and his solicitors had claimed over andpound;3m pounds. It was later discovered that there had been an oral agreement capping his liability for profit costs, but a deed purported to vary that as invalid.
Held: The court rejected the argument that it had no jurisdiction to re-open the defendant’s costs application in the absence of exceptional circumstances. The solicitors should have disclosed the facts to the court. The costs order was confirmed, but the Registrar was to make such further enquiries as he felt appropriate.
Hooper, Tomlinson LJJ, Swift J
[2012] EWCA Crim 1508
Criminal Practice Rules 76.4(4)(b)
England and Wales
Cited – Taylor v Lawrence CA 4-Feb-2002
A party sought to re-open a judgment on the Court of Appeal after it had been perfected. A case had been tried before a judge. One party had asked for a different judge to be appointed, after the judge disclosed that he had been a client of the firm . .
Cited – Kenneth L Kellar Carib West Limited v Stanley A Williams PC 24-Jun-2004
(Turks and Caicos Islands) The appellant had failed in his action but argued that he should not be called upon to pay the costs of the respondent because there had been an unlawful conditional fee agreement. The bill had referred to one factor as . .
Cited – Regina v Shiraj Patel CACD 2009
The court considered the powers available to it where leave to appeal to it appeared to have been obtained by deception. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 August 2022; Ref: scu.462294
The court heard appeals against disclosure orders made under the 2002 Act. The appellants argued that neither the offence, nor the assets nor the appellants themselves were within the jurisdiction.
[2010] EWCA Civ 907, [2010] 1 WLR 542, [2010] CP Rep 43, [2010] Lloyds Rep FC 606
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, 1990 Strasbourg Convention on Laundering, Search, Seizure and Confiscation of the Proceeds from Crime
England and Wales
See Also – Serious Organised Crime Agency v Perry and Others Admn 30-Jul-2009
The respondents sought to have set aside a world wide asset freezing and associated orders obtained by SOCA against them. They said that the Court had no jurisdiction over them, and that the Agency was guilty of wilful non-disclosure. They first . .
See Also – Perry and Others v Serious Organised Crime Agency CA 18-May-2011
The court was asked ‘Does a court in England and Wales have the power under Part 5 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 to make a recovery order in favour of the trustee for civil recovery in respect of recoverable property outside this jurisdiction, . .
Appeal from – Perry and Others v Serious Organised Crime Agency SC 25-Jul-2012
The first appellant had been convicted of substantial frauds in Israel. He appealed against world wide asset freezing (PFO) and disclosure (DO) orders made against him. Neither the appellant, nor his offences were connected with the UK. A bank . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 22 August 2022; Ref: scu.421116
The defendants appealed saying that the judge had failed to disclose that a jury member was a serving police officer, and also complained of the judge’s directions on the ‘fundamentally different’ test applicable to cases of murder and manslaughter. The judge had allowed into evidence an otherwise irrelevant insult to the police.
Held: Though the judge might have taken a better approach, the decision for the court was as to whether it had been fair. None of the circumstances making the situation more difficult fr an officer to serve applied, and the appeals failed.
[2009] EWCA Crim 930
England and Wales
Cited – Regina v Abdroikof, Regina v Green; Regina v Williamson HL 17-Oct-2007
The House was asked whether a jury in criminal trials containing variously a Crown Prosecution Service solicitor, or a police officer would have the appearance of bias. In Abdroikof, the presence of the police officer on the jury was discovered only . .
Cited – Regina v Bow Street Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No 2) HL 15-Jan-1999
A petition was brought to request that a judgment of the House be set aside because the wife of one their lordships, Lord Hoffmann, was as an unpaid director of a subsidiary of Amnesty International which had in turn been involved in a campaign . .
Cited – Regina v Khan and Hanif CACD 14-Mar-2008
Each defendant appealed against his conviction saying that the presence on the jury of certain people involved in the law gave the appearance of bias.
Held: The court should be made aware if any potential juror either is or has been a police . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 22 August 2022; Ref: scu.347430
The Director sought civil recovery orders from the defendants.
Burnett J
[2008] EWHC 2535 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 22 August 2022; Ref: scu.277297
The claimant, an Iraqi national, had been about to be deported when he was re-arrested for Terrorism offences for which he was acquitted. He was then made subject to a non-derogating control order. He now challenged the renewal of that order, even under less stringent terms.
Held: The restrictions imposed fell just within the boundary of a restriction on liberty without becoming equivalent to a deprivation on liberty and therefore article 5 was not engaged, and the Secretary of State’s decision to make, renew and continue the Order were not flawed.
Mittling J
[2008] EWHC 1018 (Admin)
Terrorism Act 2000, European Convention on Human Rights 5
England and Wales
Cited – Secretary of State for the Home Department v AN Admn 29-Feb-2008
The court considered a challenge to a non-derogating control order.
Held: Mitting J said: ‘the conclusion which I draw from the four speeches of the majority in MB is that unless, at a minimum, the Special Advocates are able to challenge the . .
Cited – Secretary of State for the Home Department v AF Admn 9-Apr-2008
There is no exception to the requirement that a person subject to a non-derogating control order has the right to a fair trial where the secret evidence shows that the subject of the order has no conceivable answer to the claim. . .
Cited – Secretary of State for the Home Department v JJ and others HL 31-Oct-2007
The Home Secretary appealed against a finding that a non-derogating control order was unlawful in that, in restricting the subject to an 18 hour curfew and otherwise severely limiting his social contacts, the order amounted to such a deprivation of . .
Cited – Secretary of State for the Home Department v MB CA 1-Aug-2006
The Secretary of State appealed a declaration that the restrictions imposed on the complainant under the 2005 Act were an infringement of his human rights, and a declaration of incompatibility as regards section 3.
Held: The appeal succeeded. . .
See Also – HXA v The Home Office QBD 21-May-2010
The claimant challenged as unlawful his administrative detention for 10 months pending deportation. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 22 August 2022; Ref: scu.267583
[2008] EWHC 67 (Admin), [2008] 4 All ER 432, [2008] BPIR 379
England and Wales
Updated: 22 August 2022; Ref: scu.264592
[2008] EWHC 442 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 22 August 2022; Ref: scu.266173
[2008] EWHC 148 (Admin)
England and Wales
See Also – C v Crown Prosecution Service Admn 8-Feb-2008
The court considered the practice of hearing submissions from the media in relation to reporting restrictions.
Held: Thomas LJ rejected the submission that, in conducting the Re S balancing exercise the Court should have regard to the public . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 22 August 2022; Ref: scu.264420
[2008] EWHC 132 (Admin)
Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005
England and Wales
Updated: 22 August 2022; Ref: scu.264060
[2006] EWCA Crim 1716
Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 34
England and Wales
Cited – Regina v Boyle and Another CACD 25-Aug-2006
The appellants had been convicted of murder. They complained that the judge had misdirected the jury as to the effect of their silence and the inferences to be drawn.
Held: The appeals failed. Whilst the direction on s34 was defective, it had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 22 August 2022; Ref: scu.244709
The court considered whether to quash a count of theft: ‘The fact that a possible incidental effect of the purposes of the application does find itself within those sub-provisions (a) to (d) is not one of the purposes of those provisions. It is the word ‘purpose’ by which the situation is governed. In our judgment it is improper and misconstruction to redraft the wording so as to substitute some such word as ‘consequences’ for the word ‘purpose’. So far as the motion to quash is concerned, it does not, in our judgment, come within those four sub-provisions. Basing ourselves on Gunawardena by which we are bound, and with which we respectively agree, in our judgment the prosecution’s argument succeeds. There is no jurisdictional basis upon which this Court can entertain the appeal.’
Lane CJ
Unreported, 5 February 1991
England and Wales
Followed – Regina v Gunawardena CACD 1990
At the preparatory hearing the defendants sought an order that the trial be stayed as an abuse of process on the grounds of unjustifiable delay. Held : It was refused. ‘In our judgment the words of sections 7, 8 and 9 themselves plainly demonstrate . .
Cited – In re Gunawardena, Harbutt and Banks CACD 1990
The defendant applied to stay the proceedings on the grounds that they were an abuse of process.
Held: The application for leave to appeal was rejected. The application to stay was not within the ambit of the preparatory hearing and therefore . .
Cited – Regina v Van Hoogstraten CACD 12-Dec-2003
The prosecution appealed against the refusal of the crown court to remit the case for retrial.
Held: The court had no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal against this ruling because it was not within the ambit of section 29(2) of the 1996 Act. . .
Cited – Regina v Claydon; Regina v Regina v Hall; Regina v Costall; Regina v French CACD 13-Jun-2001
The defendants faced substantial trials involving drugs offences. At a preparatory hearing the court made decisions about abuse of process and as to what evidence might be admitted. The prosecutor said there was no right of appeal.
Held: . .
Cited – Regina v Claydon; Regina v Regina v Hall; Regina v Costall; Regina v French CACD 13-Jun-2001
The defendants faced substantial trials involving drugs offences. At a preparatory hearing the court made decisions about abuse of process and as to what evidence might be admitted. The prosecutor said there was no right of appeal.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 August 2022; Ref: scu.188775
Crown’s application for permission to appeal from a decision dismissing an application for restraint orders in respect of property held by the two respondents and a single third party.
[2016] EWCA Crim 1938
England and Wales
Updated: 21 August 2022; Ref: scu.642568
The court reversed three decisions where a particular judge had said that the CPS should not have begun prosecutions, saying ‘We recognise these [ever increasing financial] pressures only too well and recognise also the need for every court to be vigilant so as to ensure that court resources are used as efficiently, as expeditiously and as effectively as possible. It is not, however, for judges to short circuit or ignore well established principles of law in the name of efficiency or to seek to prevent prosecutions properly brought to the Crown Court whether by election for trial or otherwise, from being pursued. Whether steps should be taken to limit the extent to which any particular type of case should be tried by jury is for Parliament.’
[2010] EWCA Crim 1857
England and Wales
Cited – Regina v SH CACD 3-Aug-2010
The prosecutor had appealed immediately against the judge’s withdrawal of a charge of racially aggravated use of insulting words or behaviour. The judge then ignored his obligation to continue the trial without mentioning the issue to the jury. He . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 August 2022; Ref: scu.421080
Six appeals were brought alleging various forms of irregularity by the jurors.
Held: Lord Judge said: ‘The verdict must be reached, according to the jury oath in accordance with the evidence. For this purpose each juror brings to the decision-making process, his or her own experience of life and general knowledge of the way things work in the real world; that is part of the stock-in-trade of the jury process, and the combination of the experience of a randomly selected group of 12 individuals, exercising their civic responsibility as a collective body, provides an essential strength of the system. However the introduction of extraneous material, that is non-evidential material, constitutes an irregularity. Examples . . include telephone calls into or out of the jury room, papers mistakenly included in the jury bundle, discussions between jurors and relatives or friends about the case, and in recent years, information derived by one or more jurors from the internet.’
Lord Judge LCJ, Hughes LJ, Bean J
[2010] EWCA Crim 1623, [2011] 1 WLR 200, [2010] 2 Cr App R 27, [2011] 2 All ER 83
England and Wales
Cited – Regina v B (CA 459/06) 27-May-2008
(New Zealand Court of Appeal) The court considered directions to be given to jurors as to the use of the internet whilst sitting as jurors. . .
Cited – Attorney General v Fraill and Another CACD 16-Jun-2011
Juror’s use of Facebook was contempt
The court considered whether a juror had committed contempt of court. She had communicated with a defendant via Facebook, despite explicit warnings not to use the internet.
Held: Both juror and defendant in the trial had committed contempt of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 August 2022; Ref: scu.420753
The appellants challenged an order made against them under the 2002 Act where Mr Gale had been prosecuted abroad, but not convicted on drug trafficking allegations. The Agency said that no satisfactory explanation had been given of the considerable assets accumulated, and the Court rejected the appellants’ evidence as unreliable.
Held: The appeal failed.
Carnwath, Toulson, Aikens LJJ
[2010] EWCA Civ 759, [2010] Lloyd’s Rep FC 557, [2010] 1 WLR 2881
England and Wales
See Also – The Director of the Assets Recovery Agency v Gale and others Admn 16-May-2008
Burden of costs in asset revovery case – third party without capacity. . .
Appeal from – Serious Organised Crime Agency v Gale and Others QBD 12-May-2009
Mr Gale had been prosecuted twice in foreign courts on allegations of drug trafficking. Each prosecution had failed. The Agency nevertheless sought an order under the 2002 Act alleging that his property was the fruit of criminal activity.
Appeal from – Gale and Another v Serious Organised Crime Agency SC 26-Oct-2011
Civil recovery orders had been made against the applicant. He had been accused and acquitted of drug trafficking allegations in Europe, but the judge had been persuaded that he had no proper explanation for the accumulation of his wealth, and had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 August 2022; Ref: scu.420388
The defendant appealed against his convictions on allegations of mortgage fraud conspiracy. Two jurors had been discharged after retirement, and the defendant Said that the remaining jurors should have been warned not to take account of any comments previously made by the two departing jurors.
Held: No such direction was needed. It would be impossible for a jury to comply, and: ‘ Before reaching their decision, they will have reflected on the arguments they have heard advanced by both, and in a multi-handed case by all the parties at trial, and then, in the privacy of their retiring room, the opinions and views expressed by each member of the jury. This is, as counsel for the Crown, Mr Brooke, put it in his written submission, a ‘dynamic’ process. Of course the jurors who have been discharged cannot be, and are not responsible for the eventual verdict. But until their discharge they are entitled to express their views, favourable or adverse to the prosecution or to some parts of the prosecution case, or favourable or adverse to the defendant or some part of the defence case. As the discussions proceed, the views expressed at an earlier stage may well develop and change. It is a continuing process. But while jurors are properly empanelled, the views of each and every one of them are entitled to the same careful analysis and respect as those expressed by any juror, including jurors who are later discharged. On discharge they cease to have any responsibility for the verdict, but there is no reason to imagine that the views expressed at a time when they believed that they would be responsible for the verdict were expressed any less conscientiously and responsibly than those of any other juror. Those views become part of the fabric of opinions under consideration, impossible to isolate and compartmentalise. It would therefore be wholly unrealistic for a direction to be given to the remaining members of the jury to ignore the views expressed on any subject by the departed jurors. What matters is that the discussion between the remaining jurors will continue to ebb and flow and, on refection, the views expressed by the departing juror (or jurors) would have been examined and either accepted wholly or in part, or rejected wholly or in part, or treated as irrelevant by the remaining jurors in the course of reaching the decisions to which their conscience impels them. The eventual verdict, however, is no more than that of the jurors who have been party to it as a result of the process of discussion in the privacy of the jury room. The views expressed by the departed jurors will only be relevant to the extent that the remaining jurors will have adopted or assimilated those views as their own.’
Lord Judge LCJ, Penry-Davey, Irwin JJ
[2010] EWCA Crim 201, [2010] 1 Cr App Rep 33, [2010] 4 All ER 285, [2010] 1 Cr App R 33, [2010] 1 WLR 1577
England and Wales
Cited – Regina v LS CACD 2009
After a juror had been discharged during the jury’s retirement, the judge directed the remaining members as follows: ‘I do not know and I am not going to enquire as to whether the juror whom I have discharged took part to any great extent in the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 August 2022; Ref: scu.420214
(Madras) The defendant said that he had been charged with a multiplicity of charges in breach of a local provision limiting the numbers of charges to be dealt with together.
[1901] UKPC 47
Updated: 20 August 2022; Ref: scu.419405
Mr Gale had been prosecuted twice in foreign courts on allegations of drug trafficking. Each prosecution had failed. The Agency nevertheless sought an order under the 2002 Act alleging that his property was the fruit of criminal activity.
Held: The order was granted. The court rejected Mr Gale’s case that he was ‘a genuine businessman who acquired wealth by his honest endeavours in building work, property investment and business ventures of varying kinds’. Griffiths Williams J said: ‘I am in no doubt that DG and TG engaged in unlawful conduct – in DG’s case, money laundering and drug trafficking, in TG’s case, money laundering. There is also evidence of tax evasion in four jurisdictions. They have acquired capital and various assets as a direct consequence of the money laundering and/or drug trafficking but it is not possible to quantify the extent of the tax evasion or to estimate the extent, if at all, that it contributed to their capital wealth. For reasons given during the course of the judgment and below, I am satisfied the Receiver has correctly identified recoverable property. I found DG a witness whose evidence, on the central issues, was wholly unreliable. He was so often demonstrably lying. I am not prepared to believe the evidence of TG insofar as she purported to confirm his account or to explain her involvement; she too was shown to be a liar about matters of real moment. While I am prepared to accept that DG was the moving force behind all criminal conduct, she was hardly ignorant of what he was doing and played her full part in the money laundering.’
Griffith Williams J
[2009] EWHC 1015 (QB), [2010] Lloyd’s Rep FC 39
See Also – The Director of the Assets Recovery Agency v Gale and others Admn 16-May-2008
Burden of costs in asset revovery case – third party without capacity. . .
Appeal from – Gale and Others v Serious Organised Crime Agency CA 7-Jul-2010
The appellants challenged an order made against them under the 2002 Act where Mr Gale had been prosecuted abroad, but not convicted on drug trafficking allegations. The Agency said that no satisfactory explanation had been given of the considerable . .
At first instance – Gale and Another v Serious Organised Crime Agency SC 26-Oct-2011
Civil recovery orders had been made against the applicant. He had been accused and acquitted of drug trafficking allegations in Europe, but the judge had been persuaded that he had no proper explanation for the accumulation of his wealth, and had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 August 2022; Ref: scu.417130
The company objected to the search of its offices and removal by the defendant of its computers, the officers having entered without any warrant purporting to use powers under the 1989 Act.
Held: The request for judicial review failed. The power of inspection conferred by section 118 does extend to the inspection of a computer.
Lloyd Jones J
[2010] EWHC 1469 (Admin)
Customs and Excise Management Act 1979, Finance Act 2008 114
Cited – Demand and Supply Cash and Carry Ltd and Another v HM Revenue and Customs Admn 18-Dec-2009
The claimants challenged the removal of substantial quantities of alcohol and tobacco from their warehouses.
Held: One ground of challenge was that HMRC had acted unlawfully in removing and detaining a number of computers found at the . .
Cited – Oxfordshire County Council v Oxford City Council and others HL 24-May-2006
Application had been made to register as a town or village green an area of land which was largely a boggy marsh. The local authority resisted the application wanting to use the land instead for housing. It then rejected advice it received from a . .
Cited – H, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioners of Inland Revenue Admn 23-Oct-2002
The appellant sought judicial review of the seizure by the respondents of computers found on its premises in the course of executing warrants under the Act, even though the computers might contain other matters not relevant to any investigation.
Cited – Regina v HM Commissioners of Customs and Excise ex parte Bottlestop Admn 14-May-1997
The company complained of the seizure and retention of items pursuant to a search warrant. The warrant authorised entry to the Claimant’s premises to ‘search for documents and other papers in relation to the movement of excisable goods’. In . .
Cited – Da Costa and Co (a Firm) and Collins v Thames Magistrates Court and H M Commissioners of Customs and Excise QBD 25-Jan-2002
The claimant sought to challenge search warrants issued by the respondents. The warrants were criticised as being too widely drawn, and in breach of the 1984 Act. Criticism was also made of the implementation of the searches, in the use of excess . .
Cited – Faisaltex Ltd and others, Regina (on the Application of) v Crown Court Sitting at Preston and others etc Admn 21-Nov-2008
Nine claimants sought leave to bring judicial review of the issue of search warrants against solicitors’ and business and other premises, complaining of the seizure of excluded material and of special procedure material. There were suspicions of the . .
Cited – Marlton v Tectronix UK Holdings ChD 10-Feb-2003
The court considered what was to be discovered under Part 31.4.1 of CPR. Pumfrey J expressly approved the commentary in the White Book: ‘A computer database which forms part of the business records for company is, in so far as it contains . .
Cited – Lee and Others v Solihull Magistrates Court and Another Admn 5-Dec-2013
The claimant challenged search warrants issued by the respondents, on the grounds first that the warrants were too wide in the description of the property which might be seized, that the description of property sought in the warrant was so wide that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 August 2022; Ref: scu.417089
[2007] EWCA Crim 2532, [2008] 1 Cr App R 33
England and Wales
Cited – NT, Regina v CACD 31-Mar-2010
The prosecutor appealed against a stay of the prosecution as an abuse. The prosecution had failed give the undertaking necessary on lodging the appeal to the court against whose ruling it wanted to appeal, that it agreed that the defendant should be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 18 August 2022; Ref: scu.416181
Approval of basis of plea
[2010] EWCA Crim 1154
England and Wales
Updated: 18 August 2022; Ref: scu.416110
The Crown Court had made a criminal bankruptcy order in the sum of andpound;5,000 but failed to identify how that was to be distributed between the offences. The judge subsequently, but after the 28 day period provided by section 11(2) of the 1971 Act, purported to rectify the court’s order.
Held: He was entitled to do so as it was ‘an adjustment of an inchoate order which at that moment existed.’ Where an amendment was required which had no effect on the sentence or other orders made, but merely corrected an error, the court was entitled to do so.
Lord Widgery LCJ, Bridge LJ, Woolf J
(1980) 2 Cr App R (S) 26, [1980] EWCA Crim 1, [1980] 1 All ER 861, [1981] QB 12, [1980] 3 WLR 151
England and Wales
Applied – Regina v Michael QBD 1976
There has been a failure on the part of the trial judge to include costs incurred at a committal hearing in an order for costs which was made in favour of an accused who had been acquitted. It had plainly been the intention of the trial judge to . .
Cited – Norman and Others, Regina v CACD 20-Jul-2006
The defendant said that the judge in setting his sentence had failed correctly to identify the time he had spent in custody awaiting trial, and which would act as time served.
Held: The defendants were entitled to a direction. If the time for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 18 August 2022; Ref: scu.244713
[2011] NIQB 69
Northern Ireland
Updated: 18 August 2022; Ref: scu.444761
Langstaff J
[2010] EWHC 661 (Admin)
Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 24
England and Wales
Updated: 17 August 2022; Ref: scu.408634
The minister appealed against an order dismissing an application for a confiscation order as an abuse of process. The defendant had earlier had been told that no application would be made.
Toulson, Griffith Williams JJ
[2010] EWHC 805 (Admin)
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, Social Security Administration 1992 111A(1)
England and Wales
Updated: 17 August 2022; Ref: scu.408633
[2010] EWHC 663 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 17 August 2022; Ref: scu.408615
Appeal against conviction for burglary: ‘The appeal is concerned only with the directions given to the jury as to the inferences which they might draw after the appellant absconded during the course of his trial.’
Held: The direction was faulty, but the evidence was strong and there had been no miscarriage of justice.
Kennedy LJ VP QB, Poole, David Steele JJ
[2001] EWCA Crim 2545, [2002] Crim LR 526, [2002] 2 Cr App R 8
Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 35(2)
England and Wales
Cited – Regina v Cowan and Another CACD 12-Oct-1995
Detailed directions were provided for the judge to give to a jury where a defendant chooses not to give evidence in his defence in the Crown Court.
Lord Taylor of Gosforth said: ‘1. The judge will have told the jury that the burden of proof . .
Cited – David Gordon Radford v Kent County Council Admn 18-Feb-1998
. .
Cited – Regina v Davis, Rowe, Johnson CACD 17-Jul-2000
The court made a distinction between convictions found on appeal to be unfair, and those found to be unsafe. The prosecution had not disclosed to the defendants that the source of their information was a police informer. The European Court of Human . .
Cited – Regina v John Victor Hayward, Anthony William Jones, Paul Nigel Purvis CACD 31-Jan-2001
A defendant can forego his right to attend his trial, but he still had the general right to be present, and to have legal representation at the trial. The court’s discretion to proceed in his absence should only be exercised with great care. A trial . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.406606
[2010] EWHC 645 (QB)
Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.406532
The judge had ruled that the evidence intended to be offered could not create offences within the 1977 Act. Verdicts of not guilty were entered. The decision was a terminating ruling. The prosecutor failed to give the appropriate section 58 undertaking on appealing.
Held: Attending to the purpose of the 2003 Act, the prosecutor’s mistake was recitified and the appeal could continue.
As to the substantial appeal, the judge had found that the tenancy or licence was an excluded one. The resident landlord having terminated the licence, the occupiers became trespassers outside the protection of the 1977 Act. However the judge had erred since the occupiers had been given a minimum term of six months which the landlord’s notice did not abridge. It could be brought to an end only for a breach of its terms.
Sir Igor Judge P, David J, David Clarke J
[2008] EWCA Crim 483
Protection from Eviction Act 1977 1(3A)(a), Criminal Justice Act 2003 58
England and Wales
Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.406147
The court had allowed as exception to a criminal restraining order his reasonable living expenses. He sought an order allowing him to pay his legal aid contribution from those expenses.
Held: The section allowed reasonable living expenses as an exemption, but did not allow payments of contributions as a condition of his grant of public funding for legal representation in proceedings for judicial review of the decision to prosecute him for the offences in respect of which the restraint order was imposed.
Lord Justice Hooper, Mr Justice David Clarke and Judge Roberts, QC
Times 16-Jun-2009
England and Wales
Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.374723
The defendant appealed against a decision that he should face a prosecution for contempt of court for breach of a restraint order.
Held: The court did have the jurisdiction to deal with such a complaint.
Toulson LJ, Mr Justice Andrew Smith LJ, Bean J
Times 24-Oct-2008
England and Wales
Cited – Balogh v St Albans Crown Court CA 1975
The defendant, a solicitors’ clerk attending a trial, grew bored, and set out to release laughing gas into the court through a vent. He had been seen earlier and was caught before he achieved his end. He appealed his committal; for contempt, saying . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Channel 4 Television Company Limited and Another 1993
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.280414
[2008] NIQB 135
Northern Ireland
Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.278565
No. 94/7352/S2, Unreported, 9 February 1995
England and Wales
Cited – H, Regina v Re Interlocutory Application CACD 7-Jul-2006
The defendant sought leave to appeal against a refusal of a crown court judge at a preparatory hearing to order disclosure.
Held: Because orders for disclosure would not form part of the material to be considered in a preparatory hearing as . .
Cited – H, Regina v (Interlocutory application: Disclosure) HL 28-Feb-2007
The trial judge had refused an order requested at a preparatory hearing by the defence for the disclosure of documents held by the prosecutor. The House was now asked whether a right of appeal existed against such a refusal.
Held: The practice . .
Cited – H, Regina v (Interlocutory application: Disclosure) HL 28-Feb-2007
The trial judge had refused an order requested at a preparatory hearing by the defence for the disclosure of documents held by the prosecutor. The House was now asked whether a right of appeal existed against such a refusal.
Held: The practice . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.244190
Issues relating to disclosure obligations and the stay of proceedings as an abuse of process. Both relate to the disclosure of material concerning Intoximeters used for testing alcohol on the breath.
[2005] EWHC 2986 (QB)
England and Wales
Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.238320
(Court of Appeal of Jersey) The appellant had been convicted of laundering the proceeds of her husband’s drug trafficking. The Attorney-General now appealed against her successful appeal on sentence and confiscation order. Both she and her husband ran legitimate businesses, and she managed the bank accounts. Though the income from the husband’s business increased rapidly, the prosecution’s accountant accepted that she might have believed this was a legitimate improvement in his business. This did not apply to payments into personal accounts, which involved many cash deposits.
Held: The Court of Appeal had been wrong to re-assess the factual basis of the evidence supporting the orders, and had erred in its calculations. The original orders were restored.
Lord Hoffmann, Lord Woolf, Lord Steyn, Baroness Hale of Richmond, Lord Mance
[2006] UKPC 14, [2006] 1 WLR 1485
Drug Trafficking Offences (Jersey) Law 1988 17(1)(a)
England and Wales
Cited – Rex v Hopkins-Husson 1949
Lord Goddard C discussed the ability of the criminal court of appeal to set aside a conviction in exceptional cases where the verdict was ‘one which no reasonable tribunal could have found.’ He said: ‘[T]he fact that some members or all the members . .
Cited – Barlow Clowes International Ltd and Another v Eurotrust International Ltd and others PC 10-Oct-2005
(Court of Appeal of the Isle of Man) Defendants appealed a finding of dishonest assistance in the activities of Barlow Clowes.
Held: The judge had been able to reach the conclusions on the basis of the evidence. The appeal of the deemster . .
Cited – Snooks and Dowse v United Kingdom ECHR 2002
The court described the way that a Jersey Jurat was selected: ‘Jurats are . . elected by a special electoral college whose members include the bailiff, the jurats, advocates and solicitors of the Royal Court and members of Jersey’s legislature, the . .
Cited – Aladesuru v The Queen PC 1956
Directors of the Standard Bank in Nigeria appealed from a conviction for false accounting. They had appealed to the West African Court of Appeal who said referring to the difference between civil and criminal appeals: ‘This difference has been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.239585
Complaint as to prosecution and conviction in claimant’s absence.
Mr Justice Collins
[2005] EWHC 2842 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.237828
A single judge hearing an application for leave to appeal against conviction, does not have power to refer the case to the Criminal Cases Review Commission.
Held: The Act allows only the full court to order a reference. It should be changed.
Rose, LJ, Penry Davey, David Clarke JJ
Times 29-Oct-2003
England and Wales
Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.187207
The defendant made dishonest representations in a document which might, at a later stage, have led to a hire purchase agreement.
Held: Obtaining a hire purchase agreement can amount to the obtaining of services. Halai held that a mortgage advance cannot be described as a service. A hire purchase agreement is distinguishable. A hire purchase agreement is the hiring of goods with various options given to the hirer, who in turn agrees to pay the instalments, maintain the vehicle and so on. The hire purchasing of a vehicle on some such terms can be regarded as the conferring of some benefit by doing some act, or causing or permitting an act to be done, on the understanding that the benefit has been or will be paid for, this being the definition of services in section 1(2) of the Theft Act 1978. The finance company confers a benefit by delivering possession of the vehicle to the hirer (or by causing or permitting the garage to do so) on the understanding that the hirer has paid or will pay a deposit and subsequent instalments.
(1986) 82 Cr App R 314
England and Wales
Distinguished – 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 Graham, Kansal, etc CACD 25-Oct-1996
The court discussed when it was appropriate for the Court of Appeal to substitute other lesser convictions, after the main conviction had been declared unsafe.
Held: After studying the authorities at length, the court felt that the various . .
Cited – Regina v Naviede CACD 21-Mar-1997
The defendant appealed from his conviction for dishonesty. He said that he should have allowed hi to represent himself as to certain aspect of his case, but to have legal representation for others.
Held: The judge was right to reject such a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.183259
The defendant sought to assert that he was of previous good character. The prosecution knew of convictions abroad, and sought to admit them in rebuttal. The 1984 Act did not deal with foreign convictions.
Held: The 1851 Act still applied, and appropriately certified evidence of foreign convictions could be admitted. Police fingerprint evidence was also admitted to establish the identity of the person convicted abroad.
Lord Justice Longmore, Mr Justice Johnson and Judge Rhys Davies, QC
Times 11-Mar-2002, Gazette 28-Mar-2002
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 73, Evidence Act 1851 7
England and Wales
Cited – Regina v Derwentside Justices, Ex parte Heaviside 1996
Establishing whether previous convictions listed were those of the defendant. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.167743
ECHR Article 5-3
Brought promptly before judge or other officer
Inability of judge to address issue of conditional release in early stages of detention: inadmissible
Facts – The applicants were arrested on suspicion of involvement in the murder of a police officer. They were brought, 48 hours later, before a County Court judge who reviewed the lawfulness of their detention and granted an extension for another 5 days (for further questioning and forensic examinations). Later, their pre-trial detention was further extended, the applicants being ultimately released without charge after 12 days.
Under Schedule 8 of the 2000 Terrorist Act of Northern Ireland, a detainee could be kept in detention for up to 28 days without charge. The lawfulness of that detention had to be reviewed by the competent judge within 48 hours and every 7 days thereafter. While that judge had the power to release if the arrest/early detention was unlawful, he/she had no power to release on bail.
Law – Article 5 – 3: Article 5 – 3 is structurally concerned with two separate matters: the early stages following an arrest, when an individual is taken into the power of the authorities, and the period pending any trial before a criminal court, during which the individual may be detained or released with or without conditions. These two limbs confer distinct rights and are not on their face logically or temporally linked.
As regards the first limb, the Court’s case-law establishes that there must be protection, through judicial control, of an individual arrested or detained ‘on reasonable suspicion of having committed [a criminal] offence’, that is to say, even before any criminal charge may have been brought. The judicial control must be prompt, automatic (in other words, not depend on the application of the detained person) and before an independent judge or other officer with the power to order release, after hearing the individual and reviewing the lawfulness of, and justification for, the arrest and detention.
The Court found those conditions were satisfied in the applicants’ case and went on to consider whether there should have been a possibility of conditional release during the period of the applicants’ detention. It noted that although the applicants were twice brought before a County Court judge while in police custody, at no time were they brought before a judge with power to order conditional release. The Court found, however, that the applicants had been detained for a relatively short period (12 days), and were thus at all times in ‘the early stages’ of the deprivation of liberty, when their detention could be justified by the existence of reasonable suspicion that they had committed a criminal offence. Nothing in the Court’s case-law on Article 5 – 3 made it necessary for consideration also to be given to their conditional release during this period.
In any event, a number of safeguards had been in place to protect the applicants against arbitrary detention: the judge could only extend detention for a maximum of 7 days and the overall period could not exceed 28 days; before granting any extension the judge had to be satisfied that there were reasonable grounds for believing that further detention was necessary and that the investigation was being conducted diligently and expeditiously; the judge also had to be satisfied that the arrest was lawful and consider the merits of detention; the first applicant had given evidence on oath during the first review and arguments from both applicants were heard during the second reviews; finally, the applicants had been able to challenge their continued detention by way of judicial review.
In the light of these factors, the absence of a possibility of conditional release during the period of the applicants’ deprivation of liberty did not give rise to any issues under Article 5 – 3.
Conclusion: inadmissible (manifestly ill-founded).
26289/12 29891/12 – Legal Summary, [2015] ECHR 538
European Convention on Human Rights
Human Rights
Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.547590
The court considered an application to appoint a receiver under the 1988 Act against background of ancillary relief proceedings.
Munby J
[2005] EWHC 2623 (Fam)
England and Wales
Updated: 16 August 2022; Ref: scu.262188
Admissibility
Nicolas Bratza, P
4973/03, [2010] ECHR 286
European Convention on Human Rights
Updated: 15 August 2022; Ref: scu.402984
Admissibility – length of detention before trial
Nicolas Bratza, P
32540/07, [2010] ECHR 256
European Convention on Human Rights
Updated: 15 August 2022; Ref: scu.402992
The defendant had pleaded guilty to murder, but subsequently the defence of diminished responsibility would have become available. He appealed.
Held: It had previously been recognised that this was a gap in the law, but that gap had not been remedied. A manslaughter verdict could still only be substituted for the verdict of a jury, and not for a guilty plea.
Rose, Hughes, Royce, LJJ
Times 07-Nov-2002, Gazette 09-Jan-2003
England and Wales
Updated: 15 August 2022; Ref: scu.178036
The defendant’s solicitor had advised him whilst at the police station to make a confession. He appealed saying that he should not have been given that advice, and that the evidence should be excluded.
Held: A solicitor’s role in the police station was not simply to make life difficult for the prosecution, nor to get the client off. Advice given in these circumstances would not normally form a basis for excluding a confession.
Lord Justice Judge, Mr Justice Astill and Judge Colston, QC
Times 22-Jul-2002, Gazette 01-Aug-2002
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 76(2)
England and Wales
Updated: 15 August 2022; Ref: scu.174438
A court granted bail subject to provision of title deeds to a property as security. The defendant deposited a charge certificate with the owner’s consent, but then absconded. The court sought to forfeit the entire property, the owner of the charge sought to protect her interest.
Held: The court had not made clear just what it wanted to obtain as security. It was the defendant who gave security, and any security should be limited to his interest. Loose reference to title deeds in such an order was only likely to lead to confusion, and courts might follow the advice given that they should generally seek cash or banker’s drafts for security. The court should not become involved in questioning the arrangement between the defendant and any third party providing security.
Brooke LJ, Morison J
Times 27-Jul-2001, Gazette 06-Sep-2001, [2001] EWHC Admin 558, [2001] EWHC QB 385
Bail Act 1976 (5), Crime and Disorder Act 1998 54(1)
England and Wales
Updated: 15 August 2022; Ref: scu.136163
Morgan LCJ
[2015] NIQB 105
Northern Ireland
Updated: 15 August 2022; Ref: scu.641777
(Scotland) The appellant had variously been convicted in reliance on evidence gathered at different stages before arrest, but in each case without being informed of any right to see a solicitor. The court was asked, as a devolution issue, at what point the duty to allow access to a solicitor arose, and what use might be made of answers given to questions before detention.
Held: (Majority 4-1) In two cases it remained compatible for the evidence obtained before arrest to be led, but in G it had been incompatible.
The case of Salduz and others had not taken such rights to the point now asserted, and it would be wrong to extend it. The line as to when access to legal advice must be provided before the person is questioned should be drawn as from the moment that he has been taken into police custody, or his freedom of action has been significantly curtailed, and ‘It would be to go further than Strasbourg has gone to hold that a person has, as a rule, a Convention right of access to a lawyer before answering any questions put to him in the course of a police search. It is not because there is a rule to this effect that I would answer the question in the affirmative. Rather it is because it is plain from the particular circumstances of the case that G was, in effect, a detainee when he was being questioned by the police. In the absence of such indications of coercion the question, as in the other cases, will be whether, taking all the circumstances into account, it would be fair to admit the whole or any part of the evidence.’
Lord Kerr, dissenting, found the use made of the evidence obtained by questioning before legal held had been offered was incompatible with the suspect’s rights. It was not open to the courts of this country to restrict a right apparently given by the Convention only because Strasbourg had not yet spoken. Choosing the moment of being taken into custody as the first occasion on which legal representation becomes necessary is arbitrary and illogical. Salduz indicates that the need to have a lawyer is not determined on a geographical or temporal basis but according to the significance of what is taking place when the admissions in question are made.
Lord Clarke said ‘the right to have access to a lawyer emerges at the point when the suspect is deprived of his liberty of movement, to any material extent, by the investigating authorities and is to be questioned by them. It follows that I am in agreement with Lord Hope that the Strasbourg jurisprudence, to date, does not support the defence contention in these references that the ECtHR has gone as far as to say that the right emerges as soon as a suspect is to be questioned by the police in whatever circumstances.’
Lord Hope, Deputy President, Lord Brown, Lord Kerr, Lord Dyson, Lord Matthew Clarke
[2011] UKSC 43, UKSC 2011/0101, 2011 SLT 1005, [2011] 1 WLR 2435
Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC Summary, SC
Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 14 15A, European Convention on Human Rights 6(1) 6(3)(c), Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 76(2) 82(1), Criminal Procedure (Legal Assistance, Detention and Appeals) (Scotland) Act 2010
Scotland
Cited – Cadder v Her Majesty’s Advocate SC 26-Oct-2010
Statement without lawyer access was inadmissible
The accused complained that he had been convicted for assault and breach of the peace on the basis of a statement made by him during an interview with the police where, under the 1995 Act, he had been denied access to a lawyer.
Held: The . .
Cited – Her Majesty’s Advocate v P SC 6-Oct-2011
(Scotland) The appellant had been interviewed by police without being offered access to a solicitor. He complained that the interview and information obtained only through it had been used to found the prosecution.
Held: The admission of the . .
Cited – Dayanan v Turkey ECHR 13-Oct-2009
The claimant challenged his conviction after he had not been given access to a lawyer whilst detained and after, during the appeal process, prosecution material was submitted to the court which was not shown to him. Nevertheless he had remained . .
Cited – Stott (Procurator Fiscal, Dunfermline) and Another v Brown PC 5-Dec-2000
The system under which the registered keeper of a vehicle was obliged to identify herself as the driver, and such admission was to be used subsequently as evidence against her on a charge of driving with excess alcohol, was not a breach of her right . .
Cited – Regina v Special Adjudicator ex parte Ullah; Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 17-Jun-2004
The applicants had had their requests for asylum refused. They complained that if they were removed from the UK, their article 3 rights would be infringed. If they were returned to Pakistan or Vietnam they would be persecuted for their religious . .
Cited – Regina (Holding and Barnes plc) v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and the Regions; Regina (Alconbury Developments Ltd and Others) v Same and Others HL 9-May-2001
Power to call in is administrative in nature
The powers of the Secretary of State to call in a planning application for his decision, and certain other planning powers, were essentially an administrative power, and not a judicial one, and therefore it was not a breach of the applicants’ rights . .
Cited – Murray v The United Kingdom ECHR 8-Feb-1996
The applicant had been denied legal advice for 48 hours after he had been taken into custody.
Held: There had been a violation of article 6(1) read with article 6(3)(c). However, it was not a breach of human rights to draw inferences from the . .
Cited – Saunders v The United Kingdom ECHR 17-Dec-1996
(Grand Chamber) The subsequent use against a defendant in a prosecution, of evidence which had been obtained under compulsion in company insolvency procedures was a convention breach of Art 6. Although not specifically mentioned in Article 6 of the . .
Cited – Magee v United Kingdom ECHR 6-Jun-2000
The denial of access to a solicitor for a suspect before interrogation was a breach of the right to a fair hearing. The breach was so fundamental as to irretrievably prejudice the rights of a defendant. The article might be expressed to refer to . .
Cited – Brennan v The United Kingdom ECHR 16-Oct-2001
The applicant had complained that, after his arrest he had been refused adequate access to a lawyer. He had not been allowed to see his solicitor for two days, and only then in the presence of a police officer. No inferences had been drawn from his . .
Cited – Huseyin Habip Taskin v Turkey ECHR 1-Feb-2011
The applicant complained that he had been denied the assistance of a lawyer during his police custody and that his police statement which had been taken in the absence of a lawyer had been used in his conviction by the trial court. . .
Cited – Hakan Duman v Turkey ECHR 23-Mar-2010
The claimant said he had not been given appropriate access to a lawyer when in police custody.
Held: The use of statements obtained at the stage of the police inquiry and the judicial investigation is not inconsistent with article 6(1), . .
Cited – Salduz v Turkey ECHR 27-Nov-2008
(Grand Chamber) The applicant had been taken into custody before he was interrogated during his detention by police officers of the anti-terrorism branch of the Izmir Security Directorate.
Held: There had been a violation of art 6(3)(c) of the . .
Cited – Arzu v Turkey ECHR 15-Sep-2009
The applicant, who was arrested and placed in custody, complained that he had been denied access to a lawyer during the initial stages of the criminal proceedings against him.
Held: The court in Salduz had considered the grievance of a lack of . .
Cited – Sharkunov and Mezentsev v Russia ECHR 10-Jun-2010
The court was asked as to the lack of legal assistance while in police custody and the use at the trial of incriminating statements that had been made at that stage.
Held: The court repeated the proposition that was first stated in Salduz, . .
Cited – Imbrioscia v Switzerland ECHR 24-Nov-1993
The applicant had been questioned several times without access to a lawyer while he was in police custody.
Held: Overall there had been no breach of article 6(1). The right set out in article 6(3)(c) is one element, among others, of the . .
Cited – Deweer v Belgium ECHR 27-Feb-1980
The applicant, a Belgian butcher, paid a fine by way of settlement in the face of an order for the closure of his shop until judgment was given in an intended criminal prosecution or until such fine was paid.
Held: Since the payment was made . .
Cited – Eckle v Germany ECHR 15-Jul-1982
Two fraud prosecutions against the claimants had lasted for 15 and 20 years respectively.
Held: Article 6.1 applies to all stages of criminal proceedings, including sentencing and any appeal. The ‘reasonable time’ in criminal matters, . .
Cited – JB v Switzerland ECHR 3-May-2001
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1; Pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention . .
Cited – Pishchalnikov v Russia ECHR 24-Sep-2009
(First Section) The applicant was interrogated while he was under arrest in police custody. He asked for the assistance of a lawyer during his interrogation, but this was disregarded by the investigator who proceeded to question him. It was argued . .
Cited – Borotyuk v Ukraine ECHR 16-Dec-2010
(Fifth Section) The applicant complained, in particular, that his continued pre-trial detention had been unjustified and that he had not been legally represented in the early stages of the criminal proceedings.
Held: The court summarised the . .
Cited – Zaichenko v Russia ECHR 18-Feb-2010
(First Section) The claimant complaned that he had not been allowed access to a lawyer when being questioned by police when he was not under arrest. He had been stopped driving home from work and his car inspected by the police after reports of . .
Cited – Galstyan v Armenia ECHR 15-Nov-2007
The claimant had been was arrested on his way home from a protest rally. He was made aware of his rights and expressly declined a lawyer.
Held: As it was his own choice not to have a lawyer, the authorities could not be held responsible for . .
Cited – Miranda v Arizona 10-Oct-1966
(United States Supreme Court) The prosecution may not use statements, whether incriminatory or exculpatory, stemming from custodial interrogation of a defendant unless it demonstrated the use of procedural safeguards which were sufficient to secure . .
Cited – Abdurahman v The United Kingdom ECHR 17-Sep-2010
The applicant was questioned by the police as a witness in connection with the attempt to detonate four bombs at separate points in the London public transport system two weeks after the bombings that took place on 7 July 2005. He had been . .
Cited – Sporrong and Lonnroth v Sweden ECHR 23-Sep-1982
Balance of Interests in peaceful enjoyment claim
(Plenary Court) The claimants challenged orders expropriating their properties for redevelopment, and the banning of construction pending redevelopment. The orders remained in place for many years.
Held: Article 1 comprises three distinct . .
Cited – Regina v Grant 17-Jul-2009
Canlii (Supreme Court of Canada) Constitutional law – Charter of Rights – Arbitrary detention – Right to counsel – Encounter between accused and police going from general neighbourhood policing to situation where . .
Cited – Shabelnik v Ukraine ECHR 19-Feb-2009
A suspect’s position will have been substantially affected as soon as the suspicion against him is being seriously investigated and the prosecution case compiled: ‘The manner in which article 6(1) and (3)(c) is to be applied during the preliminary . .
Cited – Law v McNicol 1965
. .
Cited – Regina v Samuel CA 1988
The defendant had been arrested on suspicion of armed robbery. He asked for a solicitor, but one was refused under section 58 of the 1984 Act. He appealed against his conviction saying that he should have been allowed access to a solicitor.
Cited – Regina v Special Adjudicator ex parte Ullah; Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 17-Jun-2004
The applicants had had their requests for asylum refused. They complained that if they were removed from the UK, their article 3 rights would be infringed. If they were returned to Pakistan or Vietnam they would be persecuted for their religious . .
Cited – Smith, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Defence and Oxfordshire Assistant Deputy Coroner (Equality and Human Rights Commission intervening) SC 30-Jun-2010
The deceased soldier died of heat exhaustion whilst on active service in Iraq. It was said that he was owed a duty under human rights laws, and that any coroner’s inquest should be a fuller one to satisfy the state’s duty under Article 2.
Cited – Secretary of State for Defence v Al-Skeini and others (The Redress Trust Intervening) HL 13-Jun-2007
Complaints were made as to the deaths of six Iraqi civilians which were the result of actions by a member or members of the British armed forces in Basra. One of them, Mr Baha Mousa, had died as a result of severe maltreatment in a prison occupied . .
Cited – Brusco v France ECHR 14-Oct-2010
ECJ The applicant, suspected of involvement in an assault on a man by two hooded individuals in the underground car park of a Parisian residential block, was placed in custody in the context of a request for . .
Cited – Panovits v Cyprus ECHR 11-Dec-2008
The Court was asked as to the questioning of a child when the child had gone to the police station with his father, as requested by the police, and was thereafter arrested. The applicant complained, in particular, about the fairness of criminal . .
Cited – JDB v North Carolina 16-Jun-2011
(United States Supreme Court) The court considered the applicability of Miranda protection to a police interview of a minor. . .
Cited – Her Majesty’s Advocate v P SC 6-Oct-2011
(Scotland) The appellant had been interviewed by police without being offered access to a solicitor. He complained that the interview and information obtained only through it had been used to found the prosecution.
Held: The admission of the . .
Cited – McGowan (Procurator Fiscal) v B SC 23-Nov-2011
The appellant complained that after arrest, though he had been advised of his right to legal advice, and had declined the offer, it was still wrong to have his subsequent interview relied upon at his trial.
Held: It was not incompatible with . .
Cited – McGowan (Procurator Fiscal) v B SC 23-Nov-2011
The appellant complained that after arrest, though he had been advised of his right to legal advice, and had declined the offer, it was still wrong to have his subsequent interview relied upon at his trial.
Held: It was not incompatible with . .
Cited – O’Neill v Her Majesty’s Advocate No 2 SC 13-Jun-2013
The appellants had been convicted of murder, it being said that they had disposed of her body at sea. They now said that the delay between being first questioned and being charged infringed their rights to a trial within a reasonable time, and . .
Cited – O’Neill v Her Majesty’s Advocate No 2 SC 13-Jun-2013
The appellants had been convicted of murder, it being said that they had disposed of her body at sea. They now said that the delay between being first questioned and being charged infringed their rights to a trial within a reasonable time, and . .
Cited – Beghal v Director of Public Prosecutions SC 22-Jul-2015
Questions on Entry must be answered
B was questioned at an airport under Schedule 7 to the 2000 Act, and required to answer questions asked by appropriate officers for the purpose set out. She refused to answer and was convicted of that refusal , contrary to paragraph 18 of that . .
Cited – Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis v DSD and Another SC 21-Feb-2018
Two claimants had each been sexually assaulted by a later notorious, multiple rapist. Each had made complaints to police about their assaults but said that no effective steps had been taken to investigate the serious complaints.
Held: The . .
Cited – Gordon v Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (Scotland) SC 22-Mar-2017
The appellant the Commission’s decision not to refer his case back to the court. They had agreed that a miscarriage of justice might have occurred, but concluded that it was not in the interests of justice to make such a referral. His statement had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 14 August 2022; Ref: scu.444962
(First Section) The claimant complaned that he had not been allowed access to a lawyer when being questioned by police when he was not under arrest. He had been stopped driving home from work and his car inspected by the police after reports of workers stealing diesel from their service vehicles. Two cans of diesel were discovered in the car. The applicant made self-incriminating statements in reply to questions put to him by the police at the roadside. He was charged with stealing the cans, and he was convicted. His complaint was that he had not been advised of the privilege against self-incrimination when he made his admission to the police. His position at the trial was that he had purchased the diesel at a petrol station and that he did not give this explanation to the police because he felt intimidated and did not have a receipt to prove the purchase.
Held: The court set out the general principles that are relevant to a consideration of whether there has been a violation of the right to a fair trial. It noted that article 6(3)(c) especially might be relevant before a case is sent to trial if and in so far as the fairness of the trial is likely to be seriously prejudiced by a initial failure to comply with its requirements.
The court said: ‘The right not to incriminate oneself presupposes that the prosecution in a criminal case seek to prove their case against the accused without resort to evidence obtained through methods of coercion or oppression in defiance of the will of the accused (see, inter alia, J B v Switzerland, no 31827/96, para 64, ECHR 2001-III), BAILII: [2001] ECHR 324. In this sense the right is closely linked to the presumption of innocence contained in article 6(2) of the Convention. In examining whether a procedure has extinguished the very essence of the privilege against self-incrimination, the Court must examine the nature and degree of the compulsion, the existence of any relevant safeguards in the procedures and the use to which any material so obtained is put.’
Given the context of the road check and the applicant’s inability to produce any proof of the diesel purchase at the moment of his questioning by the police, there was a suspicion of theft against him from that moment and that, although he was not yet accused of any criminal offence, his situation in the proceedings at the roadside was substantially affected. Article 6(1) was therefore engaged at that point. However, the absence of legal representation at the roadside check did not violate his right to legal assistance under article 6(3)(c).
Christos Rozakis, President
39660/02, [2010] ECHR 185
European Convention on Human Rights 6(1) 6(3)(c)
Cited – Imbrioscia v Switzerland ECHR 24-Nov-1993
The applicant had been questioned several times without access to a lawyer while he was in police custody.
Held: Overall there had been no breach of article 6(1). The right set out in article 6(3)(c) is one element, among others, of the . .
Cited – Deweer v Belgium ECHR 27-Feb-1980
The applicant, a Belgian butcher, paid a fine by way of settlement in the face of an order for the closure of his shop until judgment was given in an intended criminal prosecution or until such fine was paid.
Held: Since the payment was made . .
Cited – Eckle v Germany ECHR 15-Jul-1982
Two fraud prosecutions against the claimants had lasted for 15 and 20 years respectively.
Held: Article 6.1 applies to all stages of criminal proceedings, including sentencing and any appeal. The ‘reasonable time’ in criminal matters, . .
Cited – JB v Switzerland ECHR 3-May-2001
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1; Pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention . .
Cited – Ambrose v Harris, Procurator Fiscal, Oban, etc SC 6-Oct-2011
(Scotland) The appellant had variously been convicted in reliance on evidence gathered at different stages before arrest, but in each case without being informed of any right to see a solicitor. The court was asked, as a devolution issue, at what . .
Cited – McGowan (Procurator Fiscal) v B SC 23-Nov-2011
The appellant complained that after arrest, though he had been advised of his right to legal advice, and had declined the offer, it was still wrong to have his subsequent interview relied upon at his trial.
Held: It was not incompatible with . .
Cited – O’Neill v Her Majesty’s Advocate No 2 SC 13-Jun-2013
The appellants had been convicted of murder, it being said that they had disposed of her body at sea. They now said that the delay between being first questioned and being charged infringed their rights to a trial within a reasonable time, and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 14 August 2022; Ref: scu.401728
(Scotland) The defendant appealed against his conviction saying that the prosecution had introduced at trial a statement of a witness who had died before the trial, but they had failed to disclose that he had several convictions and outstanding charges. He said this raised a devolution issue in that his human right to a fair trial had been infringed. The appeal court had said that an outstanding charge could not be relevant. At the trial the defence had been able to show that the witness had lied as to several matters, but the court said other elements could still be relied on.
Held: The fact that someone faced criminal charges could affect the ways others chose to deal with him in many ways. Though a devolution issue was raised, the court was not persuaded that the disclosure of the outstanding charges would have raisied the possibility of a changed verdict.
Lord Hope said: ‘Included within the general description of disclosable material are two classes of material, namely police statements of any witnesses on the Crown list and the previous convictions and outstanding charges relating to those witnesses.’
Lord Hope, Deputy President, Lord Rodger, Lord Walker, Lord Brown, Lord Kerr
[2010] UKSC 6, UKSC 2009/0129, Times 17-Feb-2009, [2010] HRLR 16, 2010 SCL 452, 2010 SLT 261
Bailii, SC, SC Summ, Bailii Summary
Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 259(5)
Scotland
Cited – Her Majesty’s Advocate v Murtagh (the High Court of Justiciary Scotland) PC 3-Aug-2009
All police statements as a class must be disclosed to the accused. . .
Cited – McDonald v Her Majesty’s Advocate PC 16-Oct-2008
(The High Court of Justiciary Scotland) The defendant sought to appeal against his convictions for murder and and assault. The HCJ in Scotland had refused to receive a devolution minute.
Held: The refusal was itself sufficient to give the . .
Cited – Holland v Her Majesty’s Advocate (Devolution) PC 11-May-2005
The defendant appealed his convictions for robbery. He had been subject to a dock identification, and he complained that the prosecution had failed in its duties of disclosure.
Held: The combination of several failings meant that the defendant . .
Cited – McInnes v Her Majesty’s Advocate SC 10-Feb-2010
The defendant complained that the prosecution had not disclosed the fact that a prosecution witness had convictions, and that had it been disclosed it would have undermined the prosecution. Other statements taken were not disclosed as had later . .
Cited – Fraser v Her Majesty’s Advocate SC 25-May-2011
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder, saying that the prosecution had failed to disclose certain matters.
Held: The appeal succeeded, the conviction was quashed and the case remitted to the Scottish courts to consider . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 13 August 2022; Ref: scu.396702
The defendants sought leave to appeal against confiscation orders.
[2010] EWCA Crim 101
England and Wales
Updated: 13 August 2022; Ref: scu.396606
The police were admitted to have failed to comply with Code of Practice A. The defendant appealed against the conviction on his admission.
Held: A failure to adhere to a requirement in PACE is not mere ‘rigmarole’: ‘These provisions are not a mere rigmarole to be recited like a mantra and then ignored. The provisions of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act and the Code relating to caution, are designed to protect a detainee. They are important protections. They impose significant disciplines upon the police as to how they are to behave. If they can secure a serious conviction in breach of those provisions that is an important matter which undermines the protection of a detainee in the police station’
Moses LJ, Hickinbottom J
[2009] EWHC 3521 (Admin)
England and Wales
Cited – Beeres v Crown Prosecution Service (West Midlands) Admn 13-Feb-2014
The defendant said that his confession should not have been admitted in evidence it having been given when he had not been advised of his rights whilst at the police station because of his inebriation.
Held: The appeal failed. A confession is, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 13 August 2022; Ref: scu.396502
Pill LJ, King J, Same Heather Steele
[2008] EWCA Crim 1870, [2008] MHLR 202
Child Abduction Act 1984, Criminal Appeal Act 1968 6
Updated: 13 August 2022; Ref: scu.396434
The court granted leave to appeal against conviction, but then dismissed the defendant’s appeal. He had been convicted of sexual assault on a young child.
Held: A delay in a hearing did not of itself render the evidence of a very young complainant child unreliable. The child, aged four and a half years old had been consistent in her accounts of the events which took place when she was three years old. The court took the opportunity to emphasise that it can be inappropriate for an advocate in such cases to subject a young child witness to a detailed cross-examination with a view of undering the complainant’s credibility. The trial process must cater for the needs of witnesses. The competency test is not failed because the forensic techniques of the advocate or the processes of the court have to be adapted to enable the witness to give the best evidence of which he or she is capable.
Lord Judge, Lord Chief Justice, Lady Justice Hallett and Mrs Justice Macur
[2010] EWCA Crim 4, Times 05-Feb-2010
England and Wales
Cited – Regina v F CACD 14-Mar-2013
The crown sought leave to appeal against a terminating ruling. The defendant was accused of rape and sexual assault against his sister, profoundly deaf and with learning difficulties. The judge had found the victim to not be competent to give . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 13 August 2022; Ref: scu.393345
Laws LJ, Sir Thayne Forbes
[2010] EWHC 12 (Admin), [2010] Lloyd’s Rep FC 286
England and Wales
Updated: 13 August 2022; Ref: scu.392875
Statement of Facts. The applicant resisted deportation to Jordan to face trial on on terrorism related charges, saying that there was a real risk that the evidence to be presented against him would include evidence obtained by torture.
8139/09, [2009] ECHR 855
European Convention on Human Rights
Human Rights
See Also – Omar Othman (Abu Qatada) v The United Kingdom ECHR 17-Jan-2012
The applicant resisted his proposed deportation to Jordan to face charges of terrorism. He complained was that his retrial in Jordan would amount to a flagrant denial of justice because of a number of factors including a very real risk that . .
See Also – Othman v Secretary of State for The Home Department SIAC 6-Feb-2012
Application for bail. . .
See Also – Othman (Abu Qatada) v The United Kingdom ECHR 9-May-2012
(Press Release) Diplomatic assurances will protect Abu Qatada from torture but he cannot be deported to Jordan while there remains a real risk that evidence obtained by torture will be used against him. . .
See Also – Othman v Secretary of State for The Home Department SIAC 28-May-2012
SIAC (Deportation – Bail Application – Refused) The applicant was held in immigration detention pending a proposed deportation to his native Jordan to face retrial on terrorist charges. Having resisted his . .
See Also – Othman, Regina (on The Application of) v Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) and Others Admn 9-Aug-2012
The court gave its reasons for refusing the claimant’s applications for habeas corpus and permission to seek judicial review of his detention. He was detained pending deportation to Jordan. He resisted saying that if retried in Jordan, the evidence . .
See Also – Othman (Abu Qatada) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SIAC 12-Nov-2012
The applicant challenged his proposed deportation to Jordan to face perrorism related charges. He said that there was a real risk that the evidence used against him would have been obtained by torture.
Held: His appeal was allowed . .
See Also – Othman (Aka Abu Qatada) v Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 27-Mar-2013
The appellant sought the deportation of the respondent to his home country of Jordan to face trial on terrorism related charges. The respondent said that evidence against him would have been obtained by torture, and challenged re-assurances accepted . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 13 August 2022; Ref: scu.346970
The court considered an application for compensation by a former prisoner whose conviction had been overturned.
Mitting J
[2007] EWHC 3218 (Admin)
England and Wales
Cited – Siddall, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice Admn 16-Mar-2009
The claimant had been imprisoned then released after his conviction for sexual assaults. He appealed against rejection of his claim for compensation. The criterion for compensation was demonstrating that something had ‘gone seriously wrong in the . .
Appeal from – Allen (formerly Harris), Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice CA 15-Jul-2008
The claimant appealed against refusal of a review of the defendant to allow her compensation after her conviction for manslaughter of her infant son was quashed.
Held: The conviction had been based on flawed expert evidence.
Article 6(2) . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 13 August 2022; Ref: scu.271200
The denial of access to a solicitor for a suspect before interrogation was a breach of the right to a fair hearing. The breach was so fundamental as to irretrievably prejudice the rights of a defendant. The article might be expressed to refer to rights at trial, but the exercise of such rights derived from pre-trial activities. The refusal of the court to draw adverse inferences did not repair the damage to his right to a fair trial.
the Court stated: ‘in the constituent parts of the United Kingdom there is not always a uniform approach to legislation in particular areas. Whether or not an individual can assert a right derived from legislation may accordingly depend on the geographical reach of the legislation at issue and the individual’s location at the time. For the Court, in so far as there exists a difference in treatment of detained suspects under the [Northern Irish legislation] and the legislation of England and Wales on the matters referred to by the applicant, that difference is not to be explained in terms of personal characteristics, such as national origin or association with a national minority, but on the geographical location where the individual is arrested and detained. This permits legislation to take account of regional differences and characteristics of an objective and reasonable nature. In the present case, such a difference does not amount to discriminatory treatment within the meaning of article 14 of the Convention.’
J-P Costa P
Times 20-Jun-2000, 28135/95, [2000] ECHR 216, (2001) 31 EHRR 35
European Convention on Human Rights Art 6
Human Rights
Cited – Magee v The United Kingdom ECHR 6-Jun-2000
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1+6-3-c; No violation of Art. 14+6; Pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient; . .
Cited – Ambrose v Harris, Procurator Fiscal, Oban, etc SC 6-Oct-2011
(Scotland) The appellant had variously been convicted in reliance on evidence gathered at different stages before arrest, but in each case without being informed of any right to see a solicitor. The court was asked, as a devolution issue, at what . .
Cited – A and B, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Health SC 14-Jun-2017
The court was asked: ‘Was it unlawful for the Secretary of State for Health, the respondent, who had power to make provisions for the functioning of the National Health Service in England, to have failed to make a provision which would have enabled . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 13 August 2022; Ref: scu.83296
(Bahamas)
Baroness Hale of Richmond PSC, Lord Wilson, Lord Sumption, Lord Hughes, Lord Lloyd-Jones JJSC
[2018] UKPC 30, [2018] WLR(D) 659, [2018] 1 WLR 4887
Commonwealth
Updated: 11 August 2022; Ref: scu.631402
The claimant challenged the certificate issued in his prosecution as to the date on which the prosecutor said that sufficient evidence had come into his hands, to commence a prosecution under the 1988 Act.
Scott Baker LJ, Cranston J
[2009] EWHC 3177 (Admin)
Social Security Administration Act 1992
England and Wales
Updated: 11 August 2022; Ref: scu.384126
Compliance with community punishment order.
[2007] EWHC 3108 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 09 August 2022; Ref: scu.271180
The complainant had not attended the trial to give evidence, and the judge refused a request for an adjournment, finding that there were no reasonable grounds for anticipating that she could be found and would be a willing witness.
Held: Such an order, even though it was a case management decision, might constitute a terminating ruling against which an appeal would lay. The right of appeal was not limited to a ruling of no case to answer.
Sir Igor Judge P, Pitcford J, Calvert-Smith J
Times 29-Oct-2007
England and Wales
Updated: 09 August 2022; Ref: scu.263218
Unreported, 9 February 1995
England and Wales
Cited – Regina v Claydon; Regina v Regina v Hall; Regina v Costall; Regina v French CACD 13-Jun-2001
The defendants faced substantial trials involving drugs offences. At a preparatory hearing the court made decisions about abuse of process and as to what evidence might be admitted. The prosecutor said there was no right of appeal.
Held: . .
Cited – Regina v Claydon; Regina v Regina v Hall; Regina v Costall; Regina v French CACD 13-Jun-2001
The defendants faced substantial trials involving drugs offences. At a preparatory hearing the court made decisions about abuse of process and as to what evidence might be admitted. The prosecutor said there was no right of appeal.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 August 2022; Ref: scu.193472
The appellant challenged his convictions, including one for escape from lawful custody. He refused to be handcuffed to be transported to the court.
Held: The court could proceed to hear an appeal in the absence of a defendant who so refused, and so was not brought to the court. In this case however, he had only been informed of the requirement on the night before, and the appeal would be adjourned for a short period to allow him another opportunity to appear.
Lord Justice Longmore, Mr Justice Wright and Judge Hyam
Times 18-Jun-2002
England and Wales
Updated: 09 August 2022; Ref: scu.174004
The defendants had been tried in cases where the prosecution had employed leading counsel. The defendants had been refused similar representation. They complained that this created an inequality of arms, and an unfair trial under Human Rights law. The question also arose as to the maximum sentence allowable after a re-trial ordered by the Court of Appeal.
Held: There was no interference with the right to a fair trial. The defendant had been properly and competently represented. As to sentence, the defendant had been first convicted, and sentenced to three and a half years imprisonment. The conviction was set aside and a re-trial ordered. The Act said that no greater sentence could be imposed on a second trial than on the first, but the Crown appealed the sentence as unduly lenient. Though cumbersome, the right procedure was for the Crown to make such an appeal on the first conviction. That could be heard before the appeal against conviction. The position on any subsequent trial would then be safeguarded.
Lord Woolf, Lord Chief Justice, Mr Justice Aikens and Mr Justice Pitchford
Times 28-Feb-2002
European Convention on Human Rights Art 6, Criminal Justice Act 1988 36
England and Wales
Updated: 09 August 2022; Ref: scu.167670
This claim raises the issue of the circumstances in which the High Court should extend the anonymity of child defendants in criminal proceedings beyond their 18th birthday.
Nicklin P QBD
[2019] EWHC 2026 (QB)
England and Wales
Updated: 09 August 2022; Ref: scu.641725
Mark Villiger, P
77362/11 – Chamber Judgment, [2014] ECHR 1164
European Convention on Human Rights
Human Rights
Updated: 08 August 2022; Ref: scu.538222
A foreign court had sent a letter requesting assistance. The Act had a clear error of drafting and the court was now asked whether it could correct that error to direct an application for a production order.
Held: The Act could be read to allow what was clearly intended.
Moses LJ, Griffith Williams J
[2013] EWHC 4366 (Admin), [2014] 1 WLR 2529, [2014] 3 All ER 354, [2013] WLR(D) 501
Crime (International Co-operation) Act 2003 13(1)(b), 16
England and Wales
Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.520869
Several of the defendants applied for assets to be excluded from an interim receiving order in order to enable them to meet legal expenses.
Henderson J
[2009] EWHC 344 (Ch), [2010] 1 WLR 1316, [2010] Bus LR 689
England and Wales
See Also – Director of the Assets Recovery Agency v Szepietowski and others Admn 29-Sep-2006
The respondent had objected that the appointment of an interim receiver had been based upon information obtained in the course of investigations undertaken in connection with different proceedings and allegations.
Held: The enforcement agency . .
See Also – Szepietowski v Assets Recovery Agency Admn 28-Nov-2006
The first respondent applied for the freezing and receiving orders in relation to two properties and chattels obtained by the first respondent under the 2002 Act to be discharged on the footing that the Agency Director has not shown that she has a . .
See Also – Assets Recovery Agency v Szepietowski and others CA 24-Jul-2007
The defendant had had set aside an interim order for assets recovery. The director appealed against a finding by the court below that he did not have ‘a good arguable case’, justifying an interim recovery order.
Held: The appeal succeeded. On . .
See Also – Assets Recovery Agency v Szepietowski and Others ChD 19-Mar-2009
The applicant defendants sought to have excluded from the effect of restrictions on their dealing with property, property which was held under trusts.
Held: The applications were rejected. There were well established rules allowing trustees . .
See Also – Serious Organised Crime Agency v Szepietowski and Others (No 2) ChD 1-Jul-2009
The Agency asked to have set aside four orders allowing the defendant to have excluded from his assets subject to an interim receiving order to allow payment of his legal expenses.
Held: There was no rule that assets once excluded from an . .
Cited – Serious Organised Crime Agency v Szepietowski and Others ChD 15-Oct-2010
The court was asked whether, as second mortgagee on the defendant’s properties, the claimant agency had the equitable power of marshalling of prior charges. The first chargee had charges over two properties, and sold the first, satisfying it debt, . .
See Also – Szepietowski v The Serious Organised Crime Agency CA 21-Jul-2011
The claimant owned properties subject to charges in favour of a bank. The Agency alleged that the properties represented the proceeds of crime. The agency had settled its claim by taking a second charge over one property. When that was sold, only . .
See Also – Szepietowski v The National Crime Agency SC 23-Oct-2013
S owned several propertie in charge to the bank, but the Agency said that each had been acquired with the proceeds of criminal activity. The parties had settled the claim by the grant of a second charge in favour of the Agency. However when that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.316597
The applicant defendants sought to have excluded from the effect of restrictions on their dealing with property, property which was held under trusts.
Held: The applications were rejected. There were well established rules allowing trustees indemnity in appropriate cases from the trust funds, and parliament had intended the 2002 Act to cover both personal and trust assets. If a trustee acted properly and was subject to an order he could still recover his costs at the end of a case. Trust assets were not exempted. A court could act also having regard to personal assets of a trustee.
Henderson J
[2009] EWHC 655 (Ch)
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 252
England and Wales
See Also – Director of the Assets Recovery Agency v Szepietowski and others Admn 29-Sep-2006
The respondent had objected that the appointment of an interim receiver had been based upon information obtained in the course of investigations undertaken in connection with different proceedings and allegations.
Held: The enforcement agency . .
See Also – Szepietowski v Assets Recovery Agency Admn 28-Nov-2006
The first respondent applied for the freezing and receiving orders in relation to two properties and chattels obtained by the first respondent under the 2002 Act to be discharged on the footing that the Agency Director has not shown that she has a . .
See Also – Assets Recovery Agency v Szepietowski and others CA 24-Jul-2007
The defendant had had set aside an interim order for assets recovery. The director appealed against a finding by the court below that he did not have ‘a good arguable case’, justifying an interim recovery order.
Held: The appeal succeeded. On . .
See Also – Serious Organised Crime Agency v Szepietowski and others ChD 27-Feb-2009
Several of the defendants applied for assets to be excluded from an interim receiving order in order to enable them to meet legal expenses. . .
See Also – Serious Organised Crime Agency v Szepietowski and Others (No 2) ChD 1-Jul-2009
The Agency asked to have set aside four orders allowing the defendant to have excluded from his assets subject to an interim receiving order to allow payment of his legal expenses.
Held: There was no rule that assets once excluded from an . .
See Also – Serious Organised Crime Agency v Szepietowski and Others ChD 15-Oct-2010
The court was asked whether, as second mortgagee on the defendant’s properties, the claimant agency had the equitable power of marshalling of prior charges. The first chargee had charges over two properties, and sold the first, satisfying it debt, . .
See Also – Szepietowski v The Serious Organised Crime Agency CA 21-Jul-2011
The claimant owned properties subject to charges in favour of a bank. The Agency alleged that the properties represented the proceeds of crime. The agency had settled its claim by taking a second charge over one property. When that was sold, only . .
See Also – Szepietowski v The National Crime Agency SC 23-Oct-2013
S owned several propertie in charge to the bank, but the Agency said that each had been acquired with the proceeds of criminal activity. The parties had settled the claim by the grant of a second charge in favour of the Agency. However when that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.326982
The Agency asked to have set aside four orders allowing the defendant to have excluded from his assets subject to an interim receiving order to allow payment of his legal expenses.
Held: There was no rule that assets once excluded from an order must remain so excluded. The section allowed but did not require an exclusion order to be made.
Henderson J
[2009] EWHC 1560 (Ch), Times 26-Aug-2009, [2002] 1 WLR 1316, [2010] Lloyd’s Rep FC 25, [2009] 4 Costs LR 615
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 252, Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 109, Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Legal Expenses in Civil Recovery Proceedings) Regulations 2005 (SI 2005 No 3382)
England and Wales
See Also – Director of the Assets Recovery Agency v Szepietowski and others Admn 29-Sep-2006
The respondent had objected that the appointment of an interim receiver had been based upon information obtained in the course of investigations undertaken in connection with different proceedings and allegations.
Held: The enforcement agency . .
See Also – Szepietowski v Assets Recovery Agency Admn 28-Nov-2006
The first respondent applied for the freezing and receiving orders in relation to two properties and chattels obtained by the first respondent under the 2002 Act to be discharged on the footing that the Agency Director has not shown that she has a . .
See Also – Assets Recovery Agency v Szepietowski and others CA 24-Jul-2007
The defendant had had set aside an interim order for assets recovery. The director appealed against a finding by the court below that he did not have ‘a good arguable case’, justifying an interim recovery order.
Held: The appeal succeeded. On . .
See Also – Serious Organised Crime Agency v Szepietowski and others ChD 27-Feb-2009
Several of the defendants applied for assets to be excluded from an interim receiving order in order to enable them to meet legal expenses. . .
See Also – Assets Recovery Agency v Szepietowski and Others ChD 19-Mar-2009
The applicant defendants sought to have excluded from the effect of restrictions on their dealing with property, property which was held under trusts.
Held: The applications were rejected. There were well established rules allowing trustees . .
Cited – Director of Assets Recovery Agency v Creaven and Others QBD 8-Nov-2005
The defendant had been acquitted of criminal charges and had an order for costs made in his favour. The claimant pursued a civil recovery order. The defendant sought a variation of the interim order.
Held: When considering such an application, . .
See Also – Serious Organised Crime Agency v Szepietowski and Others ChD 15-Oct-2010
The court was asked whether, as second mortgagee on the defendant’s properties, the claimant agency had the equitable power of marshalling of prior charges. The first chargee had charges over two properties, and sold the first, satisfying it debt, . .
See Also – Szepietowski v The Serious Organised Crime Agency CA 21-Jul-2011
The claimant owned properties subject to charges in favour of a bank. The Agency alleged that the properties represented the proceeds of crime. The agency had settled its claim by taking a second charge over one property. When that was sold, only . .
See Also – Szepietowski v The National Crime Agency SC 23-Oct-2013
S owned several propertie in charge to the bank, but the Agency said that each had been acquired with the proceeds of criminal activity. The parties had settled the claim by the grant of a second charge in favour of the Agency. However when that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.347303
The first respondent applied for the freezing and receiving orders in relation to two properties and chattels obtained by the first respondent under the 2002 Act to be discharged on the footing that the Agency Director has not shown that she has a good arguable case that the property is, or includes, recoverable property as is required by section 245A and 246 of the 2002 Act.
Held: The applications succeeded.
Mitting J
[2006] EWHC 3228 (Admin)
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 245A 246
England and Wales
See Also – Director of the Assets Recovery Agency v Szepietowski and others Admn 29-Sep-2006
The respondent had objected that the appointment of an interim receiver had been based upon information obtained in the course of investigations undertaken in connection with different proceedings and allegations.
Held: The enforcement agency . .
Appeal from – Assets Recovery Agency v Szepietowski and others CA 24-Jul-2007
The defendant had had set aside an interim order for assets recovery. The director appealed against a finding by the court below that he did not have ‘a good arguable case’, justifying an interim recovery order.
Held: The appeal succeeded. On . .
See Also – Serious Organised Crime Agency v Szepietowski and others ChD 27-Feb-2009
Several of the defendants applied for assets to be excluded from an interim receiving order in order to enable them to meet legal expenses. . .
See Also – Assets Recovery Agency v Szepietowski and Others ChD 19-Mar-2009
The applicant defendants sought to have excluded from the effect of restrictions on their dealing with property, property which was held under trusts.
Held: The applications were rejected. There were well established rules allowing trustees . .
See Also – Serious Organised Crime Agency v Szepietowski and Others (No 2) ChD 1-Jul-2009
The Agency asked to have set aside four orders allowing the defendant to have excluded from his assets subject to an interim receiving order to allow payment of his legal expenses.
Held: There was no rule that assets once excluded from an . .
See Also – Serious Organised Crime Agency v Szepietowski and Others ChD 15-Oct-2010
The court was asked whether, as second mortgagee on the defendant’s properties, the claimant agency had the equitable power of marshalling of prior charges. The first chargee had charges over two properties, and sold the first, satisfying it debt, . .
See Also – Szepietowski v The Serious Organised Crime Agency CA 21-Jul-2011
The claimant owned properties subject to charges in favour of a bank. The Agency alleged that the properties represented the proceeds of crime. The agency had settled its claim by taking a second charge over one property. When that was sold, only . .
See Also – Szepietowski v The National Crime Agency SC 23-Oct-2013
S owned several propertie in charge to the bank, but the Agency said that each had been acquired with the proceeds of criminal activity. The parties had settled the claim by the grant of a second charge in favour of the Agency. However when that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.263479
Defendants were to face trial in the US, accused of monstrous crimes. The appellant challenged the release of information to the USA by the respondent to support such prosecutions when the death penalty was a possible outcome of a conviction: ‘The issue in this case is the legality of the Government’s decision to provide mutual legal assistance to the United States – in the shape of the product of police enquiries – to facilitate the prosecution of the claimant’s son in the United States for very serious offences, some carrying the death penalty, without seeking assurances that the death penalty would not be imposed or, if imposed, would not be carried out. What is immoral and unacceptable is not necessarily unlawful. ‘
Held: The appeal succeeded: ‘ insofar as the information provided, or to be provided, to the US authorities consisted of personal data (which much of it did) the processing of such data by the Secretary of State as data controller required a conscious, contemporaneous consideration of whether the criteria for such processing were met. ‘Substantial compliance’ with those criteria, as found by the Divisional Court, is not enough. It is not in dispute that the Secretary of State, when making the decision in question, did not address his mind to the 2018 Act at all.’
Lord Kerr said: ‘I believe that the time has arrived where a common law principle should be recognised whereby it is deemed unlawful to facilitate the trial of any individual in a foreign country where, to do so, would put that person in peril of being executed. This is not a conclusion of the considerable and controversial variety suggested by the respondent. It is a natural and inevitable extension of the prohibition (in the common law as well as under the HRA) of extradition or deportation without death penalty assurances. If it appears to be an incremental step, that is only because this is the first time the matter has come before the courts for consideration, largely because the two previous occasions since 2001 on which – according to the respondent – MLA was provided without a death penalty assurance, that was done without public knowledge and so without the possibility of judicial scrutiny.’
Lady Hale, Lord Reed, Lord Kerr, Lord Carnwath, Lord Hodge, Lady Black, Lord Lloyd-Jones
[2020] UKSC 10, UKSC 2019/0057, 49 BHRC 169, [2020] 2 WLR 857, [2021] AC 937, [2020] 3 All ER 1, [2020] HRLR 9, [2020] WLR(D) 188, [2021] Crim LR 390, [2021] 1 CMLR 8
Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary, SC Summary Video, SC 30 Jul 2019 am Video, SC 30 Jul 2019 am video, SC 30 Jul 2019 pm Video, WLRD
European Convention on Human Rights P13, Data Protection Act 2018
England and Wales
Appeal from – El Gizouli, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department Admn 18-Jan-2019
The claimant challenged the giving of Mutual Legal Assistance to the US in a case where after trial for very serious terrorist allegations, the death penalty might be imposed after conviction, without first insisting that an undertaking be given . .
Cited – Sandiford, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs CA 22-May-2013
The appellant, a British national and European citizen was in prison in Bali convicted of a criminal charge for which she might face the death penalty. Having insufficient funds she sought legal assistance from the respondent for her appeal, and now . .
Cited – Gurieva and Another v Community Safety Development (UK) Ltd QBD 6-Apr-2016
Claim against private investigator, seeking compliance with the 1988 Act, in particular seeking details of personal information held.
Held: ‘The claimants’ SAR is and was valid. There was never any proper basis for questioning its validity. . .
Cited – Rabone and Another v Pennine Care NHS Foundation SC 8-Feb-2012
The claimant’s daughter had committed suicide whilst on home leave from a hospital where she had stayed as a voluntary patient with depression. Her admission had followed a suicide attempt. The hospital admitted negligence but denied that it owed . .
Cited – Osborn v The Parole Board SC 9-Oct-2013
Three prisoners raised questions as to the circumstances in which the Parole Board is required to hold an oral hearing before making an adverse decision. One of the appeals (Osborn) concerned a determinate sentence prisoner who was released on . .
Cited – Kennedy v The Charity Commission SC 26-Mar-2014
The claimant journalist sought disclosure of papers acquired by the respondent in its conduct of enquiries into the charitable Mariam appeal. The Commission referred to an absolute exemption under section 32(2) of the 2000 Act, saying that the . .
Cited – A v British Broadcasting Corporation (Scotland) SC 8-May-2014
Anonymised Party to Proceedings
The BBC challenged an order made by the Court of Session in judicial review proceedings, permitting the applicant review to delete his name and address and substituting letters of the alphabet, in the exercise (or, as the BBC argues, purported . .
Cited – Rex v Lord Rusby 1800
The common law, in being formed from time to time by the wisdom of man it grew and increased from time to time with the wisdom of mankind.
Lord Kenyon said: ‘The common law, though not to be found in the written records of the realm, yet has . .
Cited – Ahmed and Another v Regina CACD 25-Feb-2011
. .
Cited – Pratt and Morgan v The Attorney General for Jamaica and Another PC 2-Nov-1993
(Jamaica) A five year delay in execution is excessive, and can itself amount to inhuman or degrading punishment. ‘There is an instinctive revulsion against the prospect of hanging a man after he has been held under sentence of death for many years. . .
Cited – Zagorski and Baze, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills and Others Admn 29-Nov-2010
The claimants, in the US awaiting execution for murders, challenged the permitting by the defendant for export of the chemical Sodium Thipental which would be used for their execution. The respondent said that its use in general anaesthesia practice . .
Cited – A and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department (No 2) HL 8-Dec-2005
Evidence from 3rd Party Torture Inadmissible
The applicants had been detained following the issue of certificates issued by the respondent that they posed a terrorist threat. They challenged the decisions of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission saying that evidence underlying the . .
Cited – Abbott v The Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago and Others PC 12-Jun-1979
Trinidad and Tobago . .
Cited – Bell v The Director of Public Prosecutions and Another PC 30-Apr-1985
(Jamaica) Failure to provide trial within a reasonable time. There had been a lapse of seven years between the date of the alleged offence and the date of the retrial. The view was taken that there was specific prejudice caused as a consequence of . .
Cited – Lincoln Anthony Guerra v Cipriani Baptiste and others (No 2) PC 6-Nov-1995
(Trinidad and Tobago) The execution of a prisoner after a substantial delay of 5 years was a breach of his constitutional rights, constituting cruel and unusual punishment. . .
Cited – Lin and Another v Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis QBD 25-Aug-2015
The claimants were facing capital charges in Thailand. They sought the release of information held by the defendant to assist in their defence on charges of the murder of two British tourists. In particular a report had been prepared by the MPS . .
Cited – Pham v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 25-Mar-2015
The court was asked: ‘whether the Secretary of State was precluded under the British Nationality Act 1981 from making an order depriving the appellant of British citizenship because to do so would render him stateless. This turns on whether (within . .
Cited – Al-Saadoon and Mufdhi v The United Kingdom ECHR 2-Mar-2009
The claimant Iraqi nationals complained of their long term detention by British forces in Iraq, and of their transfer to the Iraqi authorities for trial for murder.
Held: The transfer was a breach of the applicants’ rights. The Iraqis had . .
Cited – Regina v Lyons, Parnes, Ronson, Saunders HL 15-Nov-2002
The defendants had been convicted on evidence obtained from them by inspectors with statutory powers to require answers on pain of conviction. Subsequently the law changed to find such activity an infringement of a defendant’s human rights.
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Bugdaycay HL 19-Feb-1986
Three applicants had lied on entry to secure admission, stayed for a considerable time, and had been treated as illegal immigrants under section 33(1). The fourth’s claim that upon being returned he would been killed, had been rejected without . .
Cited – Miller, Regina (on the Application of) v The Prime Minister; Cherry QC v Lord Advocate SC 24-Sep-2019
Prerogative act of prorogation was justiciable.
The Prime Minister had prorogued Parliament for a period of five weeks, leaving only a short time for Parliament to debate and act the forthcoming termination of the membership by the UK of the EU. The Scottish Court had decided (Cherry) that the . .
Cited – Nicklinson and Another, Regina (on The Application of) SC 25-Jun-2014
Criminality of Assisting Suicide not Infringing
The court was asked: ‘whether the present state of the law of England and Wales relating to assisting suicide infringes the European Convention on Human Rights, and whether the code published by the Director of Public Prosecutions relating to . .
Cited – Guardian News and Media Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court CA 3-Apr-2012
The newspaper applied for leave to access documents referred to but not released during the course of extradition proceedings in open court.
Held: The application was to be allowed. Though extradition proceedings were not governed by the Civil . .
Cited – Attorney-General v Guardian Newspapers Ltd (No 2) (‘Spycatcher’) HL 13-Oct-1988
Loss of Confidentiality Protection – public domain
A retired secret service employee sought to publish his memoirs from Australia. The British government sought to restrain publication there, and the defendants sought to report those proceedings, which would involve publication of the allegations . .
Cited – Amin, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 16-Oct-2003
Prisoner’s death – need for full public enquiry
The deceased had been a young Asian prisoner. He was placed in a cell overnight with a prisoner known to be racist, extremely violent and mentally unstable. He was killed. The family sought an inquiry into the death.
Held: There had been a . .
Cited – Airedale NHS Trust v Bland HL 4-Feb-1993
Procedures on Withdrawal of Life Support Treatment
The patient had been severely injured in the Hillsborough disaster, and had come to be in a persistent vegetative state (PVS). The doctors sought permission to withdraw medical treatment. The Official Solicitor appealed against an order of the Court . .
Cited – 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 v Cambridge and Huntingdon Health Committee Ex Parte B CA 10-Mar-1995
A decision by a Health Authority to withhold treatment for a patient could be properly so made. It was not ordinarily to be a matter for lawyers. A Health Authority’s withholding of treatment, which might not be in a child’s simple best interests . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.649466
The claimants were facing capital charges in Thailand. They sought the release of information held by the defendant to assist in their defence on charges of the murder of two British tourists. In particular a report had been prepared by the MPS about the investigation in Thailand after doubts about the investigation. The MPS aid that releasing the report would undermine international co-operation between police forces.
Held: The issue came down to whther the defendant had a right to refuse access. The defendant had correctly applied section 29, and the application was refused. It appeared that there was in fact nothing in the report (viewed as it was from a distance) which would provide assistance to the defendants, and ‘the objections to disclosure raised by the MPS to defeat the application are valid and, on the facts of the case, suffice to outweigh the claimants’ otherwise strong interest in access.’
Green J
[2015] EWHC 2484 (QB)
Data Protection Act 1998 7(9) 29, Directive 95/46/EC
England and Wales
Cited – Elgizouli v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 25-Mar-2020
Defendants were to face trial in the US, accused of monstrous crimes. The appellant challenged the release of information to the USA by the respondent to support such prosecutions when the death penalty was a possible outcome of a conviction: ‘The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 07 August 2022; Ref: scu.551515
The respondent had objected that the appointment of an interim receiver had been based upon information obtained in the course of investigations undertaken in connection with different proceedings and allegations.
Held: The enforcement agency was not prevented from using such information in this way, and was entitled to a declaration accordingly.
Mr Justice Silber
Times 25-Oct-2006, [2006] EWHC 2406 (Admin)
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 247 255
England and Wales
Cited – LT Piver Sarl v S and J Perfume Co Ltd 1987
A plaintiff’s representative saw an article on premises which he was inspecting pursuant to an Anton Piller order which he thought infringed the rights of third parties.
Held: He was at liberty to report this to the third party concerned. . .
Cited – Chic Fashions (West Wales) Ltd v Jones CA 12-Dec-1967
Lord Denning MR said that a constable equipped with a search warrant: ‘may seize not only the goods which he reasonably to be covered by the warrant, but also any other goods which he believes on reasonable grounds to have been stolen and to be . .
See Also – Assets Recovery Agency v Szepietowski and others CA 24-Jul-2007
The defendant had had set aside an interim order for assets recovery. The director appealed against a finding by the court below that he did not have ‘a good arguable case’, justifying an interim recovery order.
Held: The appeal succeeded. On . .
See Also – Szepietowski v Assets Recovery Agency Admn 28-Nov-2006
The first respondent applied for the freezing and receiving orders in relation to two properties and chattels obtained by the first respondent under the 2002 Act to be discharged on the footing that the Agency Director has not shown that she has a . .
See Also – Serious Organised Crime Agency v Szepietowski and others ChD 27-Feb-2009
Several of the defendants applied for assets to be excluded from an interim receiving order in order to enable them to meet legal expenses. . .
See Also – Assets Recovery Agency v Szepietowski and Others ChD 19-Mar-2009
The applicant defendants sought to have excluded from the effect of restrictions on their dealing with property, property which was held under trusts.
Held: The applications were rejected. There were well established rules allowing trustees . .
See Also – Serious Organised Crime Agency v Szepietowski and Others (No 2) ChD 1-Jul-2009
The Agency asked to have set aside four orders allowing the defendant to have excluded from his assets subject to an interim receiving order to allow payment of his legal expenses.
Held: There was no rule that assets once excluded from an . .
See Also – Serious Organised Crime Agency v Szepietowski and Others ChD 15-Oct-2010
The court was asked whether, as second mortgagee on the defendant’s properties, the claimant agency had the equitable power of marshalling of prior charges. The first chargee had charges over two properties, and sold the first, satisfying it debt, . .
See Also – Szepietowski v The Serious Organised Crime Agency CA 21-Jul-2011
The claimant owned properties subject to charges in favour of a bank. The Agency alleged that the properties represented the proceeds of crime. The agency had settled its claim by taking a second charge over one property. When that was sold, only . .
See Also – Szepietowski v The National Crime Agency SC 23-Oct-2013
S owned several propertie in charge to the bank, but the Agency said that each had been acquired with the proceeds of criminal activity. The parties had settled the claim by the grant of a second charge in favour of the Agency. However when that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.245763
Defendant policemen challenged as an abuse of process, the issue of summonses relating to events some 18 years earlier.
Neill LJ said: ‘The freeing of the Guildford Four and the comments made by the Court of Appeal attracted immediate and very wide spread publicity. We have seen, as did the magistrate, copies of the press reports. We have also been provided with video-recordings of television programmes and television news reports which were shown on October 19, 1989 and in the succeeding weeks. In addition we have had an opportunity to see video-recordings of later programmes broadcast in the course of 1990. It is right to say that much of the contemporary publicity was sensational, critical of the police and in some cases clearly hostile to the police. The comments that the respondents were liars provided headline news. I shall have to return later to consider the possible effect of this publicity on the prospects of a fair trial.’ and ‘In my judgment a clear distinction can be drawn between the publicity in the period immediately after the release of the Guildford Four and the reports and broadcasts after December 1989. The earlier material could have been prejudicial to a trial in, say, the first part of 1990. The later material on the other hand could not be regarded in my view as prejudicial in a relevant sense. Even in relation to the earlier material, however, I am quite satisfied that none of the publicity which I have seen could affect a fair trial in, at the earliest, the Autumn of 1992. A jury would be perfectly capable of deciding the case on the evidence without regard to what they might have seen or read three years or so before.’
Neill LJ
[1992] 95 Cr App R 9, [1993] 2 WLR 621
England and Wales
Cited – Regina v Alan Martin (On Appeal From Her Majesty’s Courts – Martial Appeal Court) HL 16-Dec-1997
A civilian who was subject to military law whilst abroad was properly tried by a court-martial for a murder committed whilst abroad. The accused was the son of a serving soldier, and living with him, and subject to martial law. There was no inherent . .
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.183204
Only a Crown Court has jurisdiction to order the withholding of unused material.
Times 20-Oct-1993
England and Wales
Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.90294
Jamaica- prosecution must provide copies of statements to defence. The provisions of section 20(1) and (6) of the Jamaican Constitution ‘do no more than codify in writing the requirements of the common law which ensure that an accused person receives a fair trial’.
Lord Woolf
Gazette 30-Jun-1993, [1993] 1 WLR 862
Commonwealth
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions and others v Tokai and others PC 12-Jun-1996
(Trinidad and Tobago) The appellant had been charged in 1981 with offences alleged to have been committed shortly before. The proceedings continued until his appeal for one was dismissed in 1988. The wounding charges were proceeded with only in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.90170
Appeals and transfers for trial from Miskin Justices are to be to Merthyr Tydfil Crown Court.
Gazette 05-Jul-1995
England and Wales
Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.90241
The Privy Council lacked jurisdiction to hear appeals against sentence on ground of delay, and until all domestic remedies have been exhausted.
Times 04-Nov-1993, Gazette 19-Jan-1994, Independent 11-Nov-1993, [1994] 2 AC 36
Commonwealth
Cited – The Attorney General for St Christopher and Nevis v Rodionov PC 20-Jul-2004
(St. Christopher and Nevis) The government of Canada requested the extradition of the respondent. The Attorney General sought special leave to appeal against the order for his discharge from custody, which had been on the grounds of the prejudice . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.90245
Statutory review of the terrorism prevention and investigation measures imposed in 2019 on each respondent by the Secretary of State for the Home Department under the TPIM Act 2011
Farbey J
[2021] EWHC 266 (Admin)
England and Wales
Updated: 06 August 2022; Ref: scu.658047