Category: Criminal Sentencing

Regina (U) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis; Regina (R) v Chief Constable of Durham Constabulary: Admn 29 Nov 2002

In each case the youth aged 15 had been given a warning after admitting a sexual assault, and a decision had been made not to prosecute. On accepting the warnings, they had then been required to place their names on the sex offenders register, but this had not been explained to them when asked about accepting the warning.
Held: In one case, the acceptance of guilt was equivocal in any event. The placing of a name on the sex offender’s register added a public dimension to the consequences of accepting guilt, but without the putative offender having the opportunity of a trial. To have this happen without the consequences being explained, and by an administrative procedure was unfair.
Held: The warning procedure was not one requiring the consent of the youth (as opposed to a caution of an adult)

Latham LJ, Field J
Times 10-Dec-2002, [2003] 1 WLR 897, [2002] EWHC 2486 (Admin)
Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights 6.1, Crime and Disorder Act 1998 65 66
England and Wales

Criminal Sentencing, Human Rights, Police

Updated: 09 January 2022; Ref: scu.178366

F and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 21 Apr 2010

The defendants had been convicted and sentenced for offences which under the 2003 Act would mean that they stayed permanently on the Sex Offenders’ register without possibility of a review. The Secretary of State appealed aganst a finding that the absence of a review was incompatible with their article 8 rights.
Held: The appeal failed. It was a question of proportionality. The requirements to notify addresses and report were infringements of the respondents’ article 8 rights. The court asked, to what extent it was an infringement, how vauable was the regime in the pursuit of a legitimate aim, and whether the success of the arrangement was dependent on the absence of a review system.
Where, given an opportunity, a defendant could satisfy the authorities that there was no need for a continued registration, there was no purpose served by a continued registration, and its associated infringements. There were already systems in place and relied on for the review of sex offenders, and therefore a system of review was practicable.
Lord Phillips said: ‘it is obvious that there must be some circumstances in which an appropriate tribunal could reliably conclude that the risk of an individual carrying out a further sexual offence can be discounted to the extent that continuance of notification requirements is unjustified. As the courts below have observed, it is open to the legislature to impose an appropriately high threshold for review. Registration systems for sexual offenders are not uncommon in other jurisdictions. Those acting for the first respondent have drawn attention to registration requirements for sexual offenders in France, Ireland, the seven Australian States, Canada, South Africa and the United States. Almost all of these have provisions for review. This does not suggest that the review exercise is not practicable.’

Lord Phillips (President), Lord Hope (Deputy President), Lord Rodger, Lady Hale, Lord Clarke
[2010] WLR (D) 98, [2010] UKSC 17, [2010] 2 WLR 992, [2011] 1 AC 331, [2010] 2 All ER 707, (2010) 113 BMLR 209, 113 BMLR 209
SC, SC Summ, Bailii, WLRD
Sexual Offences Act 2003 82, European Convention on Human Rughts 8
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – De Freitas v The Permanent Secretary of Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries, Lands and Housing and others PC 30-Jun-1998
(Antigua and Barbuda) The applicant was employed as a civil servant. He joined a demonstration alleging corruption in a minister. It was alleged he had infringed his duties as a civil servant, and he replied that the constitution allowed him to . .
Appeal From – JF and Another, Regina (On the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 23-Jul-2009
The claimants complained of the system under which they had been placed on the sex offenders’ register indefinitely with no ability to have the registration reviewed. They said that this interfered with their right to respect for their private and . .
Cited – Huang v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 21-Mar-2007
Appellate Roles – Human Rights – Families Split
The House considered the decision making role of immigration appellate authorities when deciding appeals on Human Rights grounds, against refusal of leave to enter or remain, under section 65. In each case the asylum applicant had had his own . .
At first Instance – F and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department QBD 19-Dec-2008
The defendants each complained that being placed on the sex offenders’ register indefinitely was a disproportionate interference with their rights for private and family life, and under European law.
Held: A declaration of incompatibility was . .
Cited – Stubbings and Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 22-Oct-1996
There was no human rights breach where the victims of sex abuse had been refused a right to sue for damages out of time. The question is whether and to what extent differences in otherwise similar situations justify a different treatment in law: . .
Cited – Ibbotson v United Kingdom ECHR 1998
While the applicant was serving a sentence for possession of obscene material, the 1997 Act came into force, requiring him to register with the police. It was argued that the passing of the Act and its impact on the offender involved a ‘penalty’ . .
Cited – Bouchacourt v France ECHR 17-Dec-2009
The applicant had been sentenced to ten years’ imprisonment for rape and sexual assault on minors. His name had been placed automatically on a Register of Sexual and Violent Offenders, and had had to confirm his address every year and to give notice . .
Cited – Marper v United Kingdom; S v United Kingdom ECHR 4-Dec-2008
(Grand Chamber) The applicants complained that on being arrested on suspicion of offences, samples of their DNA had been taken, but then despite being released without conviction, the samples had retained on the Police database.
Held: . .
Cited – Adamson v The United Kingdom ECHR 26-Jan-1999
The Court reached the following conclusion as to the purpose of the notification requirements for sex offenders: ‘the purpose of the measures in question is to contribute towards a lower rate of reoffending in sex offenders, since a person’s . .
Cited – Massey v United Kingdom ECHR 8-Apr-2003
The applicant complained that there was no ‘assessment or review’ of the necessity for his sex offender registration. . .
Cited – Gallagher, Re an Application By for Judicial Review QBNI 9-Apr-2003
The applicant had been convicted of offences of indecent assault. He contended that the notification requirements of the 1997 Act infringed his rights under Article 8.
Held: The court rejected the claim: ‘The task of deciding whether the . .
Cited – Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2) HL 10-Jul-2003
The respondent appealed against a finding that the provision which made a loan agreement completely invalid for lack of compliance with the 1974 Act was itself invalid under the Human Rights Act since it deprived the respondent of its property . .
Cited – A v The Scottish Ministers and Others, Re Application for Judicial Review SCS 27-Nov-2007
. .
Cited – Forbes v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 11-Jul-2006
The defendant had been placed on the sex offenders’ register on conviction for fraudulent evasion of prohibitions on importing goods, by importing indecent photographs of children. He had maintained that he had not known of the exact nature of the . .

Cited by:
Cited – T, Regina (on The Application of) v Greater Manchester Police and Another Admn 9-Feb-2012
The claimant challenged the terms of an enhanced Criminal Records Certificate issued by the defendant. He had been warned in 2002 for suspicion of theft of two cycles. The record had been stepped down in 2009, but then re-instated. He wished to . .
Cited – T and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Another SC 18-Jun-2014
T and JB, asserted that the reference in certificates issued by the state to cautions given to them violated their right to respect for their private life under article 8 of the Convention. T further claims that the obligation cast upon him to . .
Cited – Gallagher for Judicial Review (NI) SC 30-Jan-2019
Each appellant complained of the disclosure by the respondent of very old and minor offences to potential employers, destroying prospects of finding work. Two statutory schemes were challenged, raising two separate questions, namely whether any . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 09 January 2022; Ref: scu.409977

Regina v Rochford: CACD 28 Jul 2010

The defendant appealed against sentence after being found in contempt. His lawyers had filed a defence statement, based on the defendant’s case, which the judge felt was inadequate. It was said that the defendant was in contempt after failing to amend it as required by the judge. He appealed against a sentence of imprisonment.
Held: Section 11 provides the sanction for failure to comply with the statutory duty, first to file a defence statement, and second to put into it those things which are required by section 6A. The sanction is comment by either the court or any other party and the freedom of the tribunal of fact to conclude that the explanation for such a failure contributes to the case against the defendant as indicating that the failure is attributable to his guilt. The course taken by the judge was different, but that this was at a pretrial stage where different sanctions were available.
At the time, it was not possible for the judge to know whether the defence statement was incomplete, and nor was he entitled to require counsel to reveal his instructions if no positive case was going to be made in the choices apparent at the time. ‘ The sanction for non-compliance is explicit in the statute in section 11. It is not open to the court to add an additional extra statutory sanction of punishment for contempt of court.’
Since the duty to file a defence statement was statutory, it was not open to deence counsel to advise a client not to do so. What should happen where a defendant proposed no positive defence to his lawyers must be decided by them on a case to case basis, but: ‘The defence statement must say that the defendant does not admit the offence or the relevant part of it as the case may be, and calls for the Crown to prove it. But it must also say that he advances no positive case because if he is going to advance a positive case that must appear in the defence statement and notice of it must be given. Unless the requirement is that the statement is made but no positive case is advanced it would be open to defendants simply to ignore section 5(5) and 6A.’ and ‘the lawyer’s duty is first of all never to advise either the absence of a defence statement or the omission from it of something which section 6A requires to be there because of the way the trial is going to be conducted. The lawyer’s duty is not to give the defendant advice on what to do. The lawyer’s duty is to explain the statutory obligation that he has and to explain the consequences which follow from disobedience of it.’

Hughes LJ VP, Rafferty DBE, Maddison JJ
[2010] EWCA Crim 1928, [2011] 1 Cr App R 11, [2011] 1 WLR 534
Bailii
Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996, Adminsitration of Justice Act 1960 13
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Penner, Regina v CACD 5-May-2010
The combination of the 1996 Act and the Criminal Procedure Rules had or at least were designed to abolish what was known as trial by ambush. . .
Cited – Kelly, Regina (on the Application of) v Warley Magistrates Court and The Law Society Admn 31-Jul-2007
. .

Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Farooqi and Others CACD 30-Sep-2013
Defendants appealed against their conviction of terrorist acts alleging incompetence by their leading counsel.
Held: The appeal failed: ‘ Notwithstanding many unfortunate features of this trial the convictions of three of the defendants, and . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Sentencing, Criminal Practice

Updated: 08 January 2022; Ref: scu.426481

Regina v Hood: CACD 2004

The defendant had been convicted of the manslaughter by gross negligence of his wife. On 14 March 2002 she had suffered a fall at home fracturing a number of bones including her right leg and hip. The defendant sought no medical help until 4 April 2002 by which time his wife was debilitated, very thin and suffering pressure sores. She did not survive her admission to hospital. The defendant appealed against sentence.
Held: The fact that the deceased was unwilling to go to hospital and that she could have sounded an alarm which would have been heard by the warden at their home were treated as mitigating features.

[2004] 1 Cr App R (s) 73
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Jenkins, Regina (on The Application of) v HM Coroner for Portsmouth and South and Others Admn 11-Dec-2009
The deceased had contracted gangrene, but not sought treatment, and he died of it. The claimant challenged the narrative verdict saying that it was perverse and that the only proper verdict was unlawful killing by his partner, a nurse who had . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 08 January 2022; Ref: scu.384058

Junior Reid, Roy Dennis and Oliver Whylie v The Queen; Errol Reece, Robert Taylor and Delroy Quelch v the Queen: PC 27 Jul 1989

PC (Jamaica)

Lord Diplock
[1989] UKPC 1, [1990] 1 AC 363
Bailii, PC, PC
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Dean Cedeno v Kenwin Logan PC 18-Dec-2000
(Trinidad and Tobago) The defendant appealed conviction and sentence for larceny, based on identification evidence. He said that the magistrate had failed to give proper weight to the need, pace Turnbull, to be careful in accepting identification . .
Cited – Delroy Ricketts v The Queen PC 15-Dec-1997
(Jamaica) Special leave was granted to the defendant to appeal his conviction for murder. Counsel had been late for his trial, and the jury empanelled. When counsel arrived he said the defendant had not understood the judge. A trial took place as to . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Sentencing, Human Rights

Updated: 08 January 2022; Ref: scu.159151

Harvey, Regina v: SC 16 Dec 2015

Police had discovered quantities of stolen goods at the appellant’s business premises. He was convicted of receiving stolen goods, and confiscation order made. He now appealed from the inclusion in that order of sums of VAT which had already been accounted for to HMRC.
Held: (Hughes and Toulson JJSC dissenting) The defendant’s appeal succeeded. Including the VAT in such an order was disproportionate. Whilst the 2002 Act served properly as a deterrent, it was not intended itself to be punitive. VAT was not a tax on a par with Income Tax or Corporation Tax. It was, in effect the taxpayer collecting tax as agent for HMRC
As to construction of the 2008 Act: ‘In para 8 of Waya, POCA was described as ‘framed … in broad terms with a certain amount of . . ‘overkill”. Lord Walker and Lord Hughes went on to say that ‘[although the statute has often been described as ‘draconian’ that cannot be a warrant for abandoning the traditional rule that a penal statute should be construed with some strictness’, adding that, ‘subject to this and to [the Human Rights Act 1998], the task of the Crown Court judge is to give effect to Parliament’s intention as expressed in the language of the statute. The statutory language must be given a fair and purposive construction in order to give effect to its legislative policy”.

Lord Neuberger, President, Lord Mance, Lord Reed, Lord Hughes, Lord Toulson
[2015] UKSC 73, [2015] WLR(D) 539, [2017] AC 105, [2016] 2 WLR 37, [2016] Lloyd’s Rep FC 41, [2016] 1 Cr App R (S) 60, [2016] Crim LR 356, [2016] 4 All ER 521, UKSC 2013/0249
Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD, SC, SC Summary
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Basso and Another v Regina CACD 19-May-2010
The defendants had been convicted of offences of failing to comply with planning enforcement notices (and fined andpound;10.00), and subsequently made subject to criminal confiscation orders. The orders had been made in respect of the gross income . .
Cited – Ahmad, Regina v SC 18-Jun-2014
The court considered the proper approach for the court to adopt, and the proper orders for the court to make, in confiscation proceedings where a number of criminals (some of whom may not be before the court) had between them acquired property or . .
At CACD – Harvey, Regina v CACD 3-Jul-2013
The defendant had been convicted of handling and receiving stolen goods. He now appealed from a confiscation order made under the 2002 Act. The defendant having admitted to benefiting from a criminal lifestyle, the court had to decide to what . .
Cited – Elida Gibbs Ltd v Commissioners Of Customs And Excise ECJ 24-Oct-1996
ECJ Where
(a) a manufacturer issues a money-off coupon, which is redeemable at the amount stated on the coupon by or at the expense of the manufacturer in favour of the retailer, (b) the coupon, which is . .
Cited – May, Regina v HL 14-May-2008
The defendant had been convicted of involvement in a substantial VAT fraud, and made subject to a confiscation order. He was made subject to a confiscation order in respect of the amounts lost to the fraud where he was involved, but argued that the . .
Cited – Waya, Regina v SC 14-Nov-2012
The defendant appealed against confiscation orders made under the 2002 Act. He had bought a flat with a substantial deposit from his own resources, and the balance from a lender. That lender was repaid after he took a replacement loan. He was later . .
Cited – Salvesen v Riddell and Another; The Lord Advocate intervening (Scotland) SC 24-Apr-2013
The appellant owned farmland tenanted by a limited partnership. One partner gave notice and the remaining partners indicated a claim for a new tenancy. He was prevented from recovering possession by section 72 of the 2003 Act. Though his claim had . .
Cited – Commission v Netherlands ECJ 8-Nov-2001
ECJ Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations – Articles 17(2)(a) and 18(1)(a) of the Sixth VAT Directive – National legislation allowing an employer to deduct, as input tax, a certain percentage of an . .
Cited – Regina v Smith (David Cadnam) HL 13-Dec-2001
Smith had bought a motor vessel, The Vertine, with andpound;55,000 provided by his co-defendant, John Marriott. In the words of the judge when imposing sentence, the respondent allowed himself to be used as Marriott’s ship owner and captain. The . .
Cited – Edwards v Regina CACD 30-Nov-2004
The defendant appealed from a confiscation order. He was stopped attempting to import substantial quantities of tobacco. He said that since it had been taken at the port, he had not derived an benefit so as to allow an order.
Held: The appeal . .
Cited – Varma, Regina v SC 10-Oct-2012
The defendant had been convicted of offences under the 1979 Act, but then conditionally discharged. He had appealed against a confiscation order. The prosecutor now appealed against an order quashing the confiscation.
Held: The appeal was . .

Cited by:
Cited – National Aids Trust v National Health Service Commissioning Board (NHS England) Admn 2-Aug-2016
NHS to make drug available
The claimant charity said that drugs (PrEP) prophylactic for AIDS / HIV should be made available by the defendant and through the NHS. The respndent said that the responsibility for preventative medicine for sexual health lay with local authorities. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Sentencing, VAT, Human Rights

Updated: 08 January 2022; Ref: scu.556976

P, Re: Admn 21 Oct 2008

Application for the appointment of a management receiver under section 77 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 in respect of certain property of Mr SMP, the defendant to these proceedings.

Mr C M G Ockelton,
(Sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge)
[2008] EWHC 3245 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales

Land, Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 08 January 2022; Ref: scu.426051

Sanam v National Crime Agency: CA 2 Dec 2015

‘This appeal concerns the competing rights of (1) the National Crime Agency (‘the NCA’) to obtain a civil recovery order (‘a CRO’) under Part 5 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (‘POCA’) in respect of property derived from unlawful conduct and (2) a wholly innocent former wife of the criminal, who would be left without any assets if such an order was made, to resist such an order on the grounds that it would be contrary to her rights under Article 1 of the First Protocol (‘A1P1’) to the European Convention on Human Rights (‘the Convention’).’

Sir Terence Etherton Ch HC, Patten, Christopher Clarke LJJ
[2015] EWCA Civ 1234
Bailii
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, European Convention on Human Rights A1P1
England and Wales

Family, Criminal Sentencing, Human Rights

Updated: 07 January 2022; Ref: scu.556267

Bristow v The Secretary of State for Justice and Another: CA 17 Nov 2015

The claimant had been setenced for offences committed in Thailand, and repatriated to serve his term in the UK. He now complained that his treatment had been worse than the potential early release dates available to those repatriated prisoners convicted of violent or sexual offending.

Lord Dyson MR, Davis, McCombe LJJ
[2015] EWCA Civ 1170
Bailii
England and Wales

Criminal Sentencing, Prisons, Human Rights

Updated: 06 January 2022; Ref: scu.554672

Attorney General’s Reference (Number 8 of 2004) (Dawson and Others): CANI 15 Apr 2005

Defendants had been convicted of offences involving supply of cannabis and cocaine, including the evasion of import controls and conspiracy. The sentences were appealed as too lenient.
Held: Where a prosecutor was aware that a plea of guilty was being entered because a defendant expected to have a particular sentence passed (in that case a suspended sentence) and the prosecutor remained silent as to the inappropriateness of the proposed sentence, it may more readily be inferred that such silence contributed to the offender’s decision to plead guilty. The court reviewed earlier cases. ‘The effect of these decisions is inescapable. In all but the most exceptional cases those convicted, even on their plea of guilty, of offences of possession of drugs (be they class A or class B drugs) with intent to supply, should receive an immediate custodial sentence.’ These cases were not so exceptional. The attention of the trial judge should have been directed by counsel for the prosecution to the well-known authorities. The failure of the prosecution to inform the judge of those authorities or to make submissions as to their effect precludes the Attorney General from making application under section 36. The omission of counsel cannot be allowed to impede the proper functioning of that provision where justice demands that the sentence be reviewed. The failure to keep a verbatim note of what was said in chambers was to be deprecated.

Carswell LCJ
[2005] NICA 18
Bailii
Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 4(3)(b)
Northern Ireland
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Aramah CACD 1982
In relation to major cases of importation of Class A drugs, the starting point for consignments exceeding 5 kilos assessed by reference to 100% purity rather than total weight, is a sentence of 14 years and upwards following conviction. In a passage . .
Cited – Regina v Hogg and others CANI 1994
The court considered sentences for the importation of drugs: ‘1. Importation of drugs on a large scale is the most serious offence in this area, and is invariably to be visited with a substantial custodial sentence. We respectfully agree with the . .
Cited – Regina v McIlwaine CANI 1998
The court dismissed an appeal against a sentence of four years imprisonment for possession of 9.88 kilos of cannabis resin with a street value of andpound;100,000: ‘So we return to the question-was this sentence manifestly excessive? We are . .
Cited – Attorney General’s Reference (No 3 of 2003) (Rogan) CANI 2001
The court discussed the need to take notes of meetings in chambers between the judge and counsel. The court set out four principles to be applied: ‘1. There should be freedom of access for counsel to judges, but that does not mean freedom to discuss . .
Cited – Regina v Hutton QBNI 1998
MacDermott LJ said: ‘The attitude of the courts in this jurisdiction to the offence of supplying proscribed drugs is well known (see the observation of the Lord Chief Justice in Haveron and a series of subsequent cases). In short the courts in this . .
Cited – Attorney General’s Reference (No 3 of 2003) CACD 7-Apr-2004
Police Officers had been acquitted of misconduct in public office. They had stood by in a police station custody suite as a prisoner lay on the floor and died.
Held: The trial took place before R -v- G which had overruled Caldwell. The . .
Cited – Attorney General’s reference (No 11 of 2003) CANI 2003
For an offence of possession of approximately 1.5 kilograms of a class A drug, cocaine, with intent to supply, the court increased a sentence of eighteen months to three and a half years. But for the effect of double jeopardy, the sentence would . .
Cited – Attorney General’s Reference (No 5 of 2003), Richard Herbert Crowe CANI 29-Sep-2003
Persons convicted of possession of drugs with intent to supply ‘must ordinarily expect a custodial sentence’, although the court did not interfere with the sentence imposed because of the exceptional nature of the case, . .
Cited – Attorney-General’s Reference (No 4 of 1989) CACD 1990
The court considered the approach to be taken by an appellate court asked to review a sentence said to be unduly lenient: ‘The first thing to be observed is that it is implicit in the section that this Court may only increase sentences which it . .
Cited – Attorney General’s Reference Nos 86 and 87 of 1999 CACD 2001
The Court considered authorities in relation to prosecution appeals against a sentence imposed by the judge where that judge had given an indication of the likely sentence: ‘. . we consider that where an indication is given by a trial judge as to . .
Cited – Attorney General for Northern Ireland Reference No 3 of 2000 CANI 28-Jun-2001
The court considered the question of the propriety of section 36 applications (to increase a sentence) where an indication has been given by the judge of the likely sentence. . .
Cited – Attorney General’s Reference (No 19 of 2004) (Charlton) CACD 2004
The sentencing judge had indicated in chambers to defence counsel, that he was minded not to impose a custodial sentence if a plea was entered to a mooted charge. Prosecuting counsel was present but did not contribute to the discussion although he . .
Cited – Attorney General’s Reference (Nos 8, 9 and 10 of 2002) (Mohammed and others) CACD 2003
The problem of an Attorney General’s Reference against the background of a judicial indication that there might be some non-custodial disposal is one which has troubled this Court on a number of occasions in the past. . .
Cited – Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 1996 (Robinson) CACD 1997
When a judge has given an indication as to sentence, that does not preclude the Attorney General from bringing the matter before the Court of Appeal for it to consider whether or not the sentence was unduly lenient. However the indication given by . .
Cited – Attorney General’s Reference No 17 of 1998 (Stokes) CACD 2-Oct-1998
The court considered the propriety of a reference of a sentence where the defendant had been given an indication of a likely sentence: ‘if it were the position that a legitimate expectation of a lenient sentence prior to a plea of guilty, was a . .

Cited by:
Cited – Rooney and Others, Re Attorney General’s Reference (Number 1 of 2005) CANI 11-Nov-2005
The defendants had been convicted or armed robbery. The Attorney General appealed against the sentences saying they were too lenient. Rooney argued that his plea of guilty had been after an indication by the judge and the reference was misguided. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 06 January 2022; Ref: scu.224132

JR123, Re Application for Judicial Review: QBNI 1 Nov 2021

The applicant seeks judicial review challenging the legality of Article 6(1) of the Rehabilitation of Offenders (Northern Ireland) Order 1978 (‘the 1978 Order’). The effect of this provision is to prevent his previous convictions from ever becoming ‘spent.’ He argues that the relevant provision is incompatible with his right to private and family life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (‘ECHR’). By these proceedings he seeks to have the impugned legislation struck down as incompatible with his Article 8 rights along with declaratory relief. The applicant is supported in this case, to include financial support, by the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission.

Colton J
[2021] NIQB 97
Bailii
Rehabilitation of Offenders (Northern Ireland) Order 1978 6(1), European Convention on Human Rights
Northern Ireland

Police, Human Rights, Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 06 January 2022; Ref: scu.670941

Boodram (also known as Chadee) and Others v Baptiste (Commissioner of Prisons) and Others: PC 26 May 1999

(Trinidad and Tobago) Where hanging was the only means for the carrying out of the death penalty, it was a lawful method of execution, and not necessarily cruel and unusual, despite evidence of the suffering caused by the process. A rule in the constitution preventing such punishment was disapplied because the procedure was already in existence when the constitution was passed, and the constitutoin preserved existing punishments.

Times 01-Jun-1999, [1999] UKPC 30, [1999] UKPC 29
Bailii, Bailii, PC, PC, PC, PC, PC, PC
England and Wales

Criminal Sentencing, Human Rights

Updated: 05 January 2022; Ref: scu.174610

ZTR, Regina v: CACD 25 Aug 2015

The appellant had been convicted for murder. Whilst serving as a prisoner he provided substantial assistance to the police in solving other crimes. The court was now asked as to the extent to which such assistance ater conviction might allow reduction of the tarriff sentence imposed.
Held: The well established common law principles should not be displaced. Nor did the Parole Board have power to reduce the minimum term. The applicant’s only remaining choice was to petition the Home Secretary under section 30 of the 1997 Act.

Lord Dyson LCJ, Saunders, Edis JJ
[2015] EWCA Crim 1427, [2016] 1 Cr App R (S) 15
Bailii
Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005, Criminal Justice Act 1997 30
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – AXN v The Queen CACD 27-May-2016
The defendant argued that greater note should have been taken on his sentencing to allow for the assistance he had given to the police after his arrest.
Held: The current accepted practice is that the text of the letter from the police to the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 03 January 2022; Ref: scu.551705

Hunte and Another v The State: PC 16 Jul 2015

Trinidad and Tobago – defendants appealed against conviction for murder and also against the sentences imposed.
Held: The fact alone that the Board was hearing an appeal against conviction and or sentence did not give it jurisdiction to order the commutation of the death penalty. Such an order required an application under a constitutional sentence.

Lord Neuberger, Lady Hale, Lord Mance, Lord Clarke, Lord Sumption, Lord Reed, Lord Toulson
[2015] UKPC 33, [2015] WLR(D) 340
Bailii, WLRD

Commonwealth, Crime, Criminal Sentencing, Constitutional

Updated: 03 January 2022; Ref: scu.551027

Bergin, Regina v: CACD 4 Jun 2014

Appeals against sentences totalling 3 years’ imprisonment, imposed following his earlier pleas of guilty at the plea and case management hearing to two related offences, one of producing a controlled drug of Class B, that is cannabis, and the other of possession of cannabis with intent to supply.

[2014] EWCA Crim 1228
Bailii
England and Wales

Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 03 January 2022; Ref: scu.533797

Watson v Regina: PC 7 Jul 2004

(Jamaica) The defendant was convicted of two murders from the same incident. The Act provided for the death penalty if he was convicted of a second murder. He appealed the death sentence in the circumstances, and said also that it was unconstitutional, being inhuman treatment.
Held: The imposition of the mandatory death sentence on the appellant subjected him to an inhuman punishment. Since the the provision had been repealed and re-instated, it was not pre-existing law and was not saved by the new constitution: ‘So long as these laws remained untouched, they did not have to be scrutinised. But as soon as they were changed, adapted or modified in any respect, except in the circumstances referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b) of section 26(9), they had to comply with the requirements of Chapter III.’ The results might be different for different constitutions.

Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Steyn, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Scott of Foscote, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, Mr. Justice Edward Zacca
[2004] UKPC 34, Times 14-Jul-2004, [2005] 1 AC 472
Bailii, PC, PC
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Reyes v The Queen PC 11-Mar-2002
(Belize) The Criminal Code of Belize provided that any murder by shooting was to be treated as Class A Murder, and be subject to the mandatory death penalty. The applicant having been convicted, appealed saying this was inhuman or degrading . .
Cited – Berthill Fox v Regina (No 2) PC 11-Mar-2002
(Saint Christopher and Nevis) The appellant had been convicted of murder, for which the penalty was death. He claimed that the sentence was an infringement of his constitutional and human rights. The constitution declared that it prevailed over all . .
Cited – Regina v Hughes PC 11-Mar-2002
(Saint Lucia) Having been convicted of murder, the defendant was made subject to the mandatory death penalty applied under St Lucia law. He appealed successfully on the basis that the constitution of St Lucia protected him from inhuman or degrading . .
Cited – Ong Ah Chuan v The Public Prosecutor PC 1980
(Singapore) It was asked whether the mandatory death sentence for trafficking in more than 15 grammes of heroin was unconstitutional. The appellant submitted that the mandatory nature of the sentence rendered it arbitrary, since it debarred the . .
Cited – Regina v Powell (Anthony) and Another; Regina v English HL 30-Oct-1997
When the court looked at the issue of foreseeability of murder in an allegation of joint enterprise, there was no requirement to show intent by the secondary party. The forseeability of the risk of the principal committing the offence from the point . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Nasralla PC 1967
(Jamaica) The constitution provided that no person tried for a criminal offence and either convicted or acquitted should again be tried for that offence. It was asked whether this was to be treated as declaring the common law or as expressing the . .
Cited – Matthew vThe State PC 7-Jul-2004
(Trinidad and Tobago) The court questioned the constitutionality of the mandatory death penalty in Trinidad.
Held: The constitution of Trinidad, when implemented, forbade cruel and unusual punishment, but also preserved existing penalties. The . .
Cited – Boyce and Joseph v Regina PC 7-Jul-2004
(Barbados) The appellants challenged the constitutionality of the death penalty in Barbados.
Held: The new constitution banned treatment which was inhuman or degrading, but preserved existing penalties. The mandatory death sentence remained in . .

Cited by:
Cited – David Gordon v The Queen PC 15-Dec-2005
PC (Jamaica) The defendant appealed his conviction for capital murder whilst in the course of committing a sexual offence.
Held: There had been weaknesses in the direction on joint enterprise, but the . .
Cited – Evon Smith v The Queen PC 14-Nov-2005
PC (Jamaica) The Board was asked whether the offence was a capital murder. The murder was committed in the course of a burglary. The defendant had stood on a ladder and reached in through a window and attacked . .
Cited – Ebanks (Jurt) v The Queen PC 16-Feb-2006
(Jamaica) The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder saying that identification evidence had been wrongly admitted and also if that appeal failed against the sentence of death. Though the witness knew the defendant, an identification . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Criminal Sentencing, Constitutional

Updated: 03 January 2022; Ref: scu.198647

Henfield v The Attorney General of the Commonwealth of The Bahamas (Appeal No 26 of 1996) and Farrington v The Attorney General of the Commonwealth of The Bahamas: PC 14 Oct 1996

(The Bahamas) A delay in carrying out an execution for 3.5 years, where the target delay had been set at 2 years, was inhuman treatment, and the execution should be set aside. The essential question in Pratt was whether the execution of a man following long delay after his sentence to death can amount to inhuman punishment contrary to Article 17(1).

Times 18-Oct-1996, [1996] UKPC 36, [1997] AC 413, Appeal No 26 of 1996 and Appeal No 37 of 1996, [1996] UKPC 4
PC, Bailii, Bailii, PC
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited in – Trevor Nathaniel Fisher v The Minister of Public Safety and Immigration and Others (No 2) PC 5-Oct-1998
PC (The Bahamas) The applicant had been convicted of murder and sentenced to death. His case was pending before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. He appealed a second time to the board, saying the . .
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 by:
Cited – Trevor Nathaniel Fisher v The Minister of Public Safety and Immigration and Others (No 2) PC 5-Oct-1998
PC (The Bahamas) The applicant had been convicted of murder and sentenced to death. His case was pending before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. He appealed a second time to the board, saying the . .
Cited – Trevor Nathaniel Fisher v The Minister of Public Safety and Immigration and Others PC 16-Dec-1997
(The Bahamas) The extent of a delay before a trial is not relevant when considering whether a subsequent delay in carrying out an execution is cruel and inhuman punishment . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 03 January 2022; Ref: scu.174578

Salih, Regina v: CACD 2 Apr 2020

The point of principle in issue on this sentence application is whether a micro SD card smuggled into prison should be categorised as a class B or class C article when it meets the definition for both class B and class C. The difference between the two is of significance because for class B the maximum sentence is 24 months’ imprisonment, whereas for class C the maximum sentence is a fine of Level 3.

[2020] EWCA Crim 658
Bailii
England and Wales

Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 03 January 2022; Ref: scu.654502

Regina v Accrington Youth Court Governor of HM Prison Risley Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Flood: Admn 22 Aug 1997

The Policy of allowing youths to be held in adult prisons for assessment purposes immdiately after conviction was unlawful.

Times 10-Oct-1997, Gazette 01-Oct-1997, [1997] EWHC Admin 783
Criminal Justice Act 1982 1C(1)
England and Wales

Criminal Sentencing, Prisons

Updated: 03 January 2022; Ref: scu.137728

The Serious Fraud Office v Saleh: QBD 21 Jul 2015

Application by the Respondent to discharge a property freezing order.
Held: Where a Canadian court had ordered the restoration of shares to their owner in consequence of the abandonment of forfeiture proceedings by the Canadian prosecuting authority, the appropriate prosecuting authority here was not thereby prevented from commencing proceedings against the proceeds of sale of those same shares where they were located within the United Kingdom.

Andrews DBE J
[2015] EWHC 2119 (QB), [2015] WLR(D) 368, [2015] Lloyd’s Rep FC 62
Bailii, WLRD
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002
England and Wales

Criminal Sentencing, International

Updated: 02 January 2022; Ref: scu.550578

McCool and Another, Regina v: CANI 22 May 2015

Renewed applications for leave to appeal by two applicants who were convicted, following pleas of guilty, of offences of false accounting. They challenged the use of the Commencement order for the 2002 Act as it applied to offences coming into force after the partial commission of continuing unlawful benefits claims.

Morgan LCJ, Coghlin LJ and Gillen LJ
[2015] NICA 31
Bailii
Theft Act (Northern Ireland) 1969 17(1)(a), Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Commencement No.5, Transitional Provisions, Savings and Amendment) Order 2003
Northern Ireland
Cited by:
Appeal from – McCool, Regina v SC 2-May-2018
The appellants complained that the recovery order made against them in part under the transitional provisions were unlawful. They had claimed benefits as single people but were married to each other and for a house not occupied. The difficulty was . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 01 January 2022; Ref: scu.549371

Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department Ex Parte Pierson: QBD 14 Nov 1995

The Home Secretary does not have the power to increase a mandatory lifer’s base sentence for retribution purposes. His powers to revise minimum life sentence are not absolute; and must be used fairly.

Independent 14-Nov-1995, Times 29-Nov-1995
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex Parte Pierson CA 8-Dec-1995
The courts’ control over the exercise by the Home Secretary of his discretion on lifers was limited to procedural fairness. It was not irrational to refuse any reduction of a lifer’s minimum sentence after aggravation involving the prisoner. . .
At First Instance – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex Parte Pierson HL 24-Jul-1997
The Home Secretary may not later extend the tariff for a lifer, after it had been set by an earlier Home Secretary, merely to satisfy needs of retribution and deterrence: ‘A power conferred by Parliament in general terms is not to be taken to . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 31 December 2021; Ref: scu.87757

Lovelace v The Queen: PC 15 Jun 2017

(St Vincent and The Grenadines) Appeal against the decision of the Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal (Saint Vincent and the Grenadines) dismissing his application for an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal against sentence of death imposed on the appellant..

[2017] UKPC 18
Bailii
England and Wales

Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 31 December 2021; Ref: scu.591296

Flynn, Meek, Nicol and McMurray v Her Majesty’s Advocate: PC 18 Mar 2004

PC (High Court of Justiciary) The applicants had each been convicted of murder, and complained that the transitional provisions for determining how long should be served under the life sentences infringed their Human Rights, the Act being made outside the competence of the Scottish Parliament.
Held: The 2001 Act incorporated the Human Rights Convention into Scottish law. It should not be taken to take away any existing right. Accordingly when deciding the punitive part of a punishment so as to prevent reference of his case to the Parole Board, the court must take account any date already set for such a hearing.

Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Baroness Hale of Richmond, Lord Carswell
Times 18-Mar-2004, [2004] UKPC D1
PC, Bailii
Prisoners and Criminal Proceedings (Scotland) Act 1993 2, Convention Rights (Compliance) (Scotland) Act 2001
Citing:
Cited – Elliott (No 2) v HM Advocate 1997
When passing a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment a trial judge was required by section 218 of the 1975 Act to specify the date of the commencement of the sentence The question whether a mandatory life sentence should be backdated was not an . .
Cited – Wynne v United Kingdom ECHR 18-Jul-1994
A Discretionary lifer is not entitled to a review by a court of his continued detention. His article five rights were not breached. Where a national court imposed a fixed sentence of imprisonment, the supervision required by article 5.4 was . .
Cited – Thynne, Wilson and Gunnell v The United Kingdom ECHR 25-Oct-1990
The applicants, discretionary life prisoners, complained of a violation on the ground that they were not able to have the continued lawfulness of their detention decided by a court at reasonable intervals throughout their imprisonment.
Held: A . .
Cited – McCreaddie v Her Majesty’s Advocate HCJ 6-Sep-2002
. .
Cited – Stewart v Her Majesty’s Advocate HCJ 6-Sep-2002
The appellant had been sentenced to life imprisonment for murder in 1993. He was an existing adult mandatory life prisoner for the purposes of Part I of the Schedule to the 2001 Act. In 2002 the High Court specified the punishment part of his . .
Cited – Stafford v The United Kingdom ECHR 28-May-2002
Grand Chamber – The appellant claimed damages for being held in prison beyond the term of his sentence. Having been released on licence from a life sentence for murder, he was re-sentenced for a cheque fraud. He was not released after the end of the . .
Cited – In Re Findlay, in re Hogben HL 1985
A public authority, and the Prison Service in particular, is free, within the limits of rationality, to decide on any policy as to how to exercise its discretions; it is entitled to change its policy from time to time for the future, and a person . .
Cited – Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2) HL 10-Jul-2003
The respondent appealed against a finding that the provision which made a loan agreement completely invalid for lack of compliance with the 1974 Act was itself invalid under the Human Rights Act since it deprived the respondent of its property . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex Parte Pierson HL 24-Jul-1997
The Home Secretary may not later extend the tariff for a lifer, after it had been set by an earlier Home Secretary, merely to satisfy needs of retribution and deterrence: ‘A power conferred by Parliament in general terms is not to be taken to . .

Cited by:
Cited – Uttley, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 30-Jul-2004
In 1995 the defendant was sentenced to twelve years for rapes committed in 1983. He complained that the consequences of the later sentence were adverse because of the 1991 Act. He would now serve three quarters of the sentence rather than two . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Criminal Sentencing, Human Rights, Constitutional

Updated: 31 December 2021; Ref: scu.194651

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex Parte Pierson: CA 8 Dec 1995

The courts’ control over the exercise by the Home Secretary of his discretion on lifers was limited to procedural fairness. It was not irrational to refuse any reduction of a lifer’s minimum sentence after aggravation involving the prisoner.

Independent 12-Dec-1995, Times 08-Dec-1995
Criminal Justice Act 1991 35
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department Ex Parte Pierson QBD 14-Nov-1995
The Home Secretary does not have the power to increase a mandatory lifer’s base sentence for retribution purposes. His powers to revise minimum life sentence are not absolute; and must be used fairly. . .

Cited by:
Appeal from – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex Parte Pierson HL 24-Jul-1997
The Home Secretary may not later extend the tariff for a lifer, after it had been set by an earlier Home Secretary, merely to satisfy needs of retribution and deterrence: ‘A power conferred by Parliament in general terms is not to be taken to . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 31 December 2021; Ref: scu.87896

Heron v Serious Organised Crime Agency and Another: CA 22 Jul 2013

H argued that it was not within the jurisdiction of the Crown Court to treat as within the confiscation order made against the first defendant, Mr Jones, property registered in her name at Waltham Abbey.

Lady Justice Arden,
Lord Justice Patten,
–And–,
Lord Justice Beatson
[2013] EWCA Civ 1106
Bailii
England and Wales

Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 31 December 2021; Ref: scu.515278

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex Parte Hindley: HL 30 Mar 2000

The prisoner, sentenced to life imprisonment with a whole life tariff for the murders of children, now appealed against the imposition of the whole life tarriff.
Held: The appeal failed. It was possible for a Home Secretary to set a whole life tariff for a person subject to a compulsory sentence of life imprisonment, provided that he was ready to review such a decision from time to time, where it was felt that no amount of time served would exhaust the need for retribution and deterrence in the circumstances of the case. Such a sentence could be brought to an end by a decision of the Home Secretary or by the death of the prisoner. An earlier tariff did not give rise to a proper expectation of being freed.
Lord Steyn said that some crimes would be sufficiently heinous to deserve life long incarceration for the purposes of pure punishment. He continued: ‘There is nothing logically inconsistent with . . saying that there are cases where the crimes are so wicked that even if the prisoner is detained until he or she dies it will not exhaust the requirements of retribution and deterrence’.

Lord Browne-Wilkinson, Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Steyn, Lord Hutton Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough
Times 31-Mar-2000, Gazette 14-Apr-2000, [2000] UKHL 21, [2000] 2 All ER 385, [2000] 2 WLR 730, [2000] Prison LR 71, [2001] 1 AC 410
House of Lords, Bailii
Prison Act 1952 27, Murder (Abolition of Death Penalty) Act 1965
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Hindley v Regina, Secretary Of State For The Home Department CA 5-Nov-1998
The Home Secretary could impose a whole life tariff (better non-tariff) on a prisoner subject to life sentence, but must leave open possibility of review and receive representations. A tariff can be increased before being communicated to the . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Doody and Others HL 25-Jun-1993
A mandatory lifer is to be permitted to suggest the period of actual sentence to be served. The Home Secretary must give reasons for refusing a lifer’s release. What fairness requires in any particular case is ‘essentially an intuitive judgment’, . .
Cited – Regina v North and East Devon Health Authority ex parte Coughlan and Secretary of State for Health Intervenor and Royal College of Nursing Intervenor CA 16-Jul-1999
Consultation to be Early and Real Listening
The claimant was severely disabled as a result of a road traffic accident. She and others were placed in an NHS home for long term disabled people and assured that this would be their home for life. Then the health authority decided that they were . .
Cited – In Re Findlay, in re Hogben HL 1985
A public authority, and the Prison Service in particular, is free, within the limits of rationality, to decide on any policy as to how to exercise its discretions; it is entitled to change its policy from time to time for the future, and a person . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex Parte Pierson HL 24-Jul-1997
The Home Secretary may not later extend the tariff for a lifer, after it had been set by an earlier Home Secretary, merely to satisfy needs of retribution and deterrence: ‘A power conferred by Parliament in general terms is not to be taken to . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State Home Department, ex parte McCartney CACD 25-May-1994
Under the applicable legislation the trial judge fixed the tariff for discretionary life sentence prisoners, but there were transitional provisions which required the Secretary of State to fix the tariff for discretionary lifers who had been . .
At First Instance – Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Hindley Admn 18-Dec-1997
The Home Secretary has the power to fix the tariff sentence for a lifer at her whole life where that was needed in order to satisfy the requirements of retribution and of deterrence.
Lord Bingham of Cornhill CJ said: ‘I can see no reason, in . .

Cited by:
Cited – Oakes and Others v Regina CACD 21-Nov-2012
A specially constituted CACD heard sentencing appeals for defendants serving life terms for very grave crimes, and in particular, the judicial assessment of the minimum term to be served by the appellants for the purposes of punishment and . .
Cited – Vinter And Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 9-Jul-2013
(Grand Chamber) The three appellants had each been convicted of exceptionally serious murders, and been sentenced to mandatory life sentences, but with provision that they could not be eligible for early release, making them whole life terms. They . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 31 December 2021; Ref: scu.85533

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex Parte Pierson: HL 24 Jul 1997

The Home Secretary may not later extend the tariff for a lifer, after it had been set by an earlier Home Secretary, merely to satisfy needs of retribution and deterrence: ‘A power conferred by Parliament in general terms is not to be taken to authorise the doing of acts by the donee of the power which adversely affect the legal rights of the citizen or the basic principles on which the law of the United Kingdom is based unless the statute conferring the power makes it clear that such was the intention of Parliament.’ Parliament legislates against the background of the principle of legality. There is a presumption that Parliament does not intend to interfere with the exercise of fundamental rights. It will be understood to do so only if it does so expressly: ‘Where wide powers of decision-making are conferred by statute, it is presumed that Parliament implicitly requires the decision to be made in accordance with the rules of natural justice: Bennion on Statutory Interpretation, p 737. However widely the power is expressed in the statute, it does not authorise that power to be exercised otherwise than in accordance with fair procedures.’
Lord Steyn spoke of the principle of finality in sentencing: ‘That brings me to the question whether any legal consequences flow from the characterisation of the Home Secretary’s function as involving a decision on punishment. It is a general principle of the common law that a lawful sentence pronounced by a judge may not retrospectively be increased.’
Lord Hope of Craighead: ‘The minimum standard of fairness does not permit a person to be punished twice for the same offence. Nor does it permit a person, once he has been told what his punishment is to be, to be given in substitution for it a more severe punishment.’
Lord Browne-Wilkinson said: ‘A power enacted by Parliament in general terms is not to be taken to authorise the doing of acts by the donee of the power which adversely affect the legal rights of the citizen or the basic principles on which the law of the United Kingdom is based unless the statute conferring the power makes it clear that such was the intention of Parliament.’

Lord Browne-Wilkinson, Lord Steyn
Times 28-Jul-1997, Gazette 01-Oct-1997, [1997] UKHL 37, [1998] AC 539, [1997] 3 All ER 577, [1997] 3 WLR 492
House of Lords, Bailii
Criminal Justice Act 1967 6(1)
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State Home Department, ex parte Leech (No 2) CA 20-May-1993
Prison rules were ultra vires in so far as they provided for reading letters between prisoners and their legal advisers. Every citizen has a right of unimpeded access to the court. A prisoner’s unimpeded access to a solicitor for the purpose of . .
Appeal from – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex Parte Pierson CA 8-Dec-1995
The courts’ control over the exercise by the Home Secretary of his discretion on lifers was limited to procedural fairness. It was not irrational to refuse any reduction of a lifer’s minimum sentence after aggravation involving the prisoner. . .
At First Instance – Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department Ex Parte Pierson QBD 14-Nov-1995
The Home Secretary does not have the power to increase a mandatory lifer’s base sentence for retribution purposes. His powers to revise minimum life sentence are not absolute; and must be used fairly. . .

Cited by:
Cited – Regina (Daly) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 23-May-2001
A prison policy requiring prisoners not to be present when their property was searched and their mail was examined was unlawful. The policy had been introduced after failures in search procedures where officers had been intimidated by the presence . .
Cited – Regina (X) v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police QBD 23-Jan-2004
The claimant, a social worker, had been accused of two offences of indecency with children, but the complainants had failed to identify him. The respondent later disclosed those allegations when called upon to provide an enhanced criminal record . .
Cited – Flynn, Meek, Nicol and McMurray v Her Majesty’s Advocate PC 18-Mar-2004
PC (High Court of Justiciary) The applicants had each been convicted of murder, and complained that the transitional provisions for determining how long should be served under the life sentences infringed their . .
Cited – B (A Minor) v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 23-Feb-2000
Prosecution to prove absence of genuine belief
To convict a defendant under the 1960 Act, the prosecution had the burden of proving the absence of a genuine belief in the defendant’s mind that the victim was 14 or over. The Act itself said nothing about any mental element, so the assumption must . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex Parte Hindley HL 30-Mar-2000
The prisoner, sentenced to life imprisonment with a whole life tariff for the murders of children, now appealed against the imposition of the whole life tarriff.
Held: The appeal failed. It was possible for a Home Secretary to set a whole life . .
Cited – Roberts v Parole Board HL 7-Jul-2005
Balancing Rights of Prisoner and Society
The appellant had been convicted of the murder of three police officers in 1966. His tariff of thirty years had now long expired. He complained that material put before the Parole Board reviewing has case had not been disclosed to him.
Held: . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for The Home Department Ex Parte Simms HL 8-Jul-1999
Ban on Prisoners talking to Journalists unlawful
The two prisoners, serving life sentences for murder, had had their appeals rejected. They continued to protest innocence, and sought to bring their campaigns to public attention through the press, having oral interviews with journalists without . .
Cited – Jackson and others v Attorney General HL 13-Oct-2005
The applicant sought to challenge the 2004 Hunting Act, saying that it had been passed under the provisions of the 1949 Parliament Act which was itself an unlawful extension of the powers given by the 1911 Parliament Act to allow the House of . .
Cited – Holme v Liverpool City Justices and Another Admn 6-Dec-2004
The defendant had been convicted of dangerous driving. The victim’s mother complained of the leniency of the sentence, and the magistrates purported to re-open the sentencing under section 142, saying they had been unaware of the very serious nature . .
Cited – Reclaiming Motion In Petition of Scott Davidson for Judicial Review of A Decision To Continue To Detain the Prisoner In Inhuman and Degrading Prison C SCS 18-Dec-2001
A prisoner sought an order for his removal from a prison found to have a regime which breached his human rights. The Crown replied that an order could not be made under s21 of the 1947 Act.
Held: The prisoner had followed through his rights to . .
Cited – Watkins v Home Office and others HL 29-Mar-2006
The claimant complained of misfeasance in public office by the prisons for having opened and read protected correspondence whilst he was in prison. The respondent argued that he had suffered no loss. The judge had found that bad faith was . .
Cited – A, K, M, Q and G v HM Treasury Admn 24-Apr-2008
The applicants were suspected of terrorist associations. Their bank accounts and similar had been frozen. They challenged the Order in Council under which the orders had been made without an opportunity for parliamentary challenge or approval.
Cited – Misick, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs Admn 1-May-2009
The former premier of the Turks and Caicos Islands sought to challenge the constitutionality of the 2009 order which was to allow suspension of parts of the Constitution and imposing a direct administration, on a final report on alleged corruption. . .
Cited – HM Treasury v Ahmed and Others SC 27-Jan-2010
The claimants objected to orders made freezing their assets under the 2006 Order, after being included in the Consolidated List of suspected members of terrorist organisations.
Held: The orders could not stand. Such orders were made by the . .
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 – Forsyth, Regina v, Regina v Mabey SC 23-Feb-2011
The defendants were to face trial on charges of making funds available to Iraq in breach of the 2000 Order. They said that the 2000 Order was ultra vires and ineffective, not having been made ‘forthwith’ after the UN resolution it was based upon, . .
Cited – Bank Mellat v Her Majesty’s Treasury (No 1) SC 19-Jun-2013
Closed Material before Supreme Court
Under the 2009 order, the appellant Bank had been effectively shut down as to its operations within the UK. It sought to use the appeal procedure, and now objected to the use of closed material procedure. The Supreme Court asked itself whether it . .
Cited – Modaresi, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Health SC 24-Jul-2013
The Court was asked: ‘As: (i) a public body with obligations in public law and (ii) a public authority under the Human Rights Act 1998 can the Secretary of State for Health ‘the S/S’ lawfully refuse to refer a patient’s case to the First-tier Mental . .
Cited – Evans and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Attorney General SC 26-Mar-2015
The Attorney General appealed against a decision for the release under the Act and Regulations of letters from HRH The Prince of Wales to various ministers and government departments.
Held: The appeal failed (Majority). The A-G had not been . .
Cited – Miller and Dos Santos v The Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union and Others QBD 13-Nov-2016
Article 50 Notice Requires Parliament’s Authority
The applicant challenged a decision by the respondent that he could use Crown prerogative powers to issue a notice under section 50 TUE to initiate the United Kingdom leaving the EU following the referendum under the 2015 Act.
Held: Once the . .
Cited – Welsh Ministers v PJ SC 17-Dec-2018
A patient detained under the Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA) may be released from compulsory detention in hospital subject to a community treatment order. The question arising on this appeal is whether a patient’s responsible clinician (may impose . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Sentencing

Leading Case

Updated: 31 December 2021; Ref: scu.135028

Thames Water Utilities Ltd, Regina v: CACD 3 Jun 2015

The company appealed against the sentence imposed on a finding that it was in breach of the 2010 Regulations. It sought to bring new evidence.
Held: In sentencing appeals the court will scrutinise intensely any application to give a factual explanation that was not before the sentencing court. The terms of the Criminal Practice Direction make clear the procedure which should be followed in relation to establishing the factual basis for sentencing.

Mitting J
[2015] EWCA Crim 960, [2015] 2 Cr App R (S) 63, [2015] WLR(D) 244, [2015] Crim LR 739, [2015] 1 WLR 4411, [2015] EWCA Crim 960, [2015] Env LR 36
Bailii
Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010 38(1)(a) 39(1)
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Rogers, Regina v CACD 1-Jul-2016
The court was asked as to as to the circumstances in which s.23 of the 1968 Act applies to fresh evidence or other information which an appellant may seek to adduce before this court on an appeal against sentence.
Held: The rules applicable to . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Sentencing, Criminal Practice

Updated: 30 December 2021; Ref: scu.547541

Chesser, Appeal Against Sentence By, Against HM Advocate: HCJ 25 May 2015

Appeal against sentences imposed for ‘ (2) theft of fuel on 15 January 2014; (6), (8) and (12) reset of cars on 5, 6 and 9 February; (13) dangerous driving, principally by attempting to evade the police on 9 February; (14)-(16) driving on the same occasion with no insurance and no licence and committing a statutory breach of the peace, involving homophobic remarks towards the police; (18) allowing himself to be carried in a stolen car on 19 February; (20) driving a stolen car on 10 March; (23)-(25) driving with no licence, no insurance and failing to identify the driver of a car, in terms of a statutory requirement, on 11 March; and (27) a breach of the appellant’s bail curfew on 23 March. ‘

Lord Carloway LCJ, Lord Malcolm
[2015] ScotHC HCJAC – 41
Bailii

Scotland, Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 30 December 2021; Ref: scu.547243

Karrar and Others v Regina: CACD 19 May 2015

‘The applicants were all convicted on 14 May 2013 of grave offences of sexual assault of young girls in what has been called in the media the ‘Oxford grooming trial’. They all received life sentences with minimum terms reflecting very substantial notional determinate terms and concurrent determinate terms. One applicant wishes to appeal against conviction and another wishes to appeal against the life sentence, but the main issue raised in this appeal is the appropriate length of the notional determinate terms imposed.’

Hallett LJ, Saunders, McGowan JJ
[2015] EWCA Crim 850
Bailii
England and Wales

Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 30 December 2021; Ref: scu.546870

Morkunas, Regina v: CACD 4 Nov 2014

When imposing a sentence for offences under the Gangmaster Act of 2004, it could be proper in appropriate circumstances to take into account sentencing guidelines associated with the people trafficking legislation because they were intended to cope with similar evils.

Sharp DBE LJ, Blake J, McCreath HHJ Rec
[2014] EWCA Crim 2750, [2015] WLR(D) 85
Bailii, WLRD
Gangmasters (Licensing) Act 2004, Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc) Act 2004
England and Wales

Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 30 December 2021; Ref: scu.546838

Lister, Regina v: CACD 31 Oct 2014

The defendant appealed against a confiscation order made on his conviction for growing cannabis plants. He said that the value used by the judge had not been that at the time when the plants were recovered.
Held: The appeal failed: ‘, while the market that has to be contemplated in assessing the available amount under section 9 of the 2002 Act must be taken as one to which the defendant can resort legally, when it comes to calculating the amount of his benefit the judge has to look to the market where such goods are ordinarily bought and sold. In the case of illegal drugs, as here, that market must be the market where the defendant will be expected to dispose of the drugs for profit and his benefit must be valued accordingly. The assessment at street value of the drugs in this case by the expert witness, which cannot be disputed, has been made on exactly that basis.’

Davis LJ, King J, Stokes QC HHJ Rec
[2014] EWCA Crim 2290
Bailii
England and Wales

Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 30 December 2021; Ref: scu.546836

Hussain v Regina (London Borough of Brent): CACD 18 Nov 2014

The defendant appealed against a confiscation order of aproximately andpound;500,000. He had been convicted of failure to comply with an enforcement notice in respect of the use of a property as two plannig units. The amount confiscated was calculated as the estimated gross income from the property over five years.
Held: The appeal failed.

Sir Brian Leveson P QBD, Green J, Sir Colin MacKay
[2014] EWCA Crim 2344, [2015] PTSR D7
Bailii
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002
England and Wales

Criminal Sentencing, Planning

Updated: 30 December 2021; Ref: scu.546837