The defendants faced charges of conspiracy to fix and maintain the prices of prescription drugs.
Held: An indictment making such allegations must identify and particularise the aggravating acts which took such a conspiracy to the level of a criminal conspiracy. It was incorrect to assume that ‘price fixing, when carried out in circumstances of secretive and deceptive behaviour, is dishonest in itself and a sufficient basis for conspiracy to defraud.’
Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Carswell, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood and Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury
 UKHL 17, Times 01-Jan-2009,  2 All ER 738,  1 Cr App R 33,  Crim LR 433,  1 WLR 458
Cited – Wai Yutsang v The Queen PC 14-Oct-1991
(Hong Kong) The defendant was chief accountant in a bank. He caused to be made false entries to fail to reflect the dishonouring of substantial cheques. He was charged alone on an allegation of conspiracy. His defence was that he merely obeyed the . .
Cited – Norris v United States of America and others HL 12-Mar-2008
The detainee appealed an order for extradition to the USA, saying that the offence (price-fixing) was not one known to English common law. The USA sought his extradition under the provisions of the Sherman Act.
Held: It was not, and it would . .
Cited – Regina v K CACD 2005
The particulars on an indictment should make clear to the defence the case which it must meet. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 14 July 2022; Ref: scu.266165