Eastern Africa – The two defendants, parties to a valid polygamous marriage, appealed against a conviction of conspiracy to obstruct, prevent, pervert or defeat the course of justice by hiding a wall clock they knew was required for the purpose of an inquiry into a criminal offence.
Held: The rule that a husband and wife cannot conspire together ‘is an example of the fiction that husband and wife are regarded for certain purposes, of which this is one, as in law one person’. The words ‘conspires’ and ‘conspiracy’ in English criminal law were not applicable to a husband and wife alone, and the words ‘other person’ in s 110(a) of the penal code of Tanganyika, if English criminal law were to be applied to their ‘interpretation’ or ‘meaning’, could not, in that context, include a spouse.
Judges:
Oaksey, Tucker, Cohen, Keith of Avonholm, Somervell of Harrow LL
Citations:
[1956] UKPC 40, (1957) 41 Cr App R 69, [1957] 2 WLR 277, [1957] AC 126, [1957] 1 All ER 385
Links:
Cited by:
Cited – Bala and Others, Regina v CACD 10-May-2016
The court was asked whether parties to a polygamous marriage recognised in Nigeria could be exempt thereby from a charge as co-conspirators because of s2 of the 1977 Act. The judge had held the marriage invalid after finding that the defendant was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Commonwealth, Crime
Updated: 20 September 2022; Ref: scu.445617
