Links: Home | swarblaw - law discussions

swarb.co.uk - law index


These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.  














Crime - From: 1985 To: 1989

This page lists 137 cases, and was prepared on 21 May 2019.


 
 Regina v Rahman; CACD 1985 - [1985] 81 Cr App R 349

 
 Bradford v McLeod; HCJ 1985 - 1985 SCCR at 379; (1986) Crim LR 690; 1986 SLT 244
 
Regina v Russell (1985) 81 Cr App 315
1985


Crime
Meaning of possession of an offending article
1 Citers



 
 Regina v Hollinshead; CACD 1985 - [1985] 1 All ER 850
 
Regina v Fritschy [1985] Crim L R 745
1985
CACD

Crime
The defendant was instructed by the owner to collect a quantity of krugerrands in London and deliver them to a safe deposit in Switzerland. The defendant, having once collected the coins, took them to Switzerland and there made away with them. The judge had directed the jury if at the time he collected the coins the defendant had formed the dishonest intention of keeping them for himself he was guilty of theft. Held: The conviction for theft was wrong on the ground, following Morris, that there had been no appropriation in England because the defendant had there taken possession of the krugerrands with the owner’s authority.
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Regina v Clarke [1985] 82 Cr App R 308
1985
CACD

Crime
A sub-machine gun was found. It was incomplete, without trigger, pivot pin or magazine, but had been designed for fully-automatic fire only. It could be operated by use of a piece of string tied across the "sear" (the catch keeping the hammer at full or half-cock) and around the trigger guard so that by applying tension to the string the gun could be operated. The Court disapproved Jobling [1981] Crim L R 625 and relied on the decision of the Court of Appeal in Pannell. The words in s.5(1)(a) were descriptive of the kind of firearm which is prohibited rather than descriptive of an individual weapon at the very time the accused was alleged to have been in possession of it (313). However a weapon might become so damaged or altered, by accident or design or by the removal of so many components, that it could no longer fairly be described as a "weapon" (313). Alternatively, the gun, even after the trigger, pivot pin and magazine had been removed, was a component part of a prohibited weapon.
1 Cites



 
 Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Storkwain; 1985 - [1985] 3 All ER 4
 
Anderton v Ryan [1985] 2 All ER 55; [1985] 2 WLR 968; [1985] AC 560; [1985] UKHL 5
1985
HL

Crime
The defendant was found in possession of a video recorder. She refused to name the source, but admitted that she believed it to be stolen. After it became clear that there was no evidence that it was in fact stolen, she was convicted of attempting to handle stolen goods. Held: The 1981 Act had changed the common law position, and the mere doing of preparatory acts which, if completed would constitute an offence, was not now sufficient. A conviction was now prevented where the full offence could not follow from the preparatory acts. None of the subsections would turn what was in fact an innocent act into an offence of attempting to commit the crime, merely by virtue of the defendant's criminal intent.
Criminal Attempts Act 1981 1
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Calhaem [1985] QB 808
1985


Crime
Once encouragement or assistance is proved to have been given, the prosecution does not have to go so far as to prove as against an accessory, that it had had a positive effect on the principle offenders conduct or on the outcome
1 Citers


 
Regina v Jackson [1985] Crim LR 442
1985
CACD

Crime
The three defendants were properly convicted of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. They agreed that a fourth man, under trial for burglary, should be shot in the leg so as to provide him with mitigation in the event he was convicted.
1 Citers


 
Rudd v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry [1987] 1 WLR 786; [1987] 2 All ER 553; (1987) 85 Cr App R 358
1985


Licensing, Crime
The court considered the word 'used' in the context of a TV Licensing prosecution. Held: The word "use" is to be interpreted in its natural and ordinary meaning.
1 Citers


 
Regina v Hollinshead; Dettlaff, Griffiths [1985] AC 975; [1985] 3 WLR 159; [1985] 1 All ER 850
2 Jan 1985
HL
Roskill L
Crime
The defendants had manufactured boxes whose sole purpose would be to reverse electricity meters. The prosecutor appealed against their acquittal by the CACD on the basis that the offence of conspiracy to aid and abet did not exist, since aiding and abetting was not a statutory offence with the 1977 Act. Held: The appeal succeeded. The House reserved the question of whether there could be a conspiracy to aid and abet, since it was sufficient to find them guilty of such a conspiracy at common law. The offence at common law and the statutory offence of conspiracy are mutually exclusive.
Criminal Law Act 1977 1(1)
1 Cites

1 Citers



 
 In Re K, decd; ChD 2-Jan-1985 - [1985] Ch 85
 
Brown, Regina v [1985] EWCA Crim 3; [1985] Crim LR 212
18 Jan 1985
CACD

Crime
Appeal from conviction for burglary
[ Bailii ]
 
Tudhope v Mccarthy [1985] ScotHC HCJAC - 1
8 Feb 1985
HCJ

Scotland, Crime

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Hancock and Shankland [1986] AC 455; [1985] UKHL 9; [1986] 2 WLR 357; 1985 SLT 214; [1986] 1 All ER 641; [1986] 1 All ER 641
27 Feb 1985
HL
Lord Scarman, Lord Keith, Lord Roskill, Lord Brightman, Lord Griffiths
Crime
Two miners on strike had pushed a concrete block from a bridge onto a three-lane highway on which a miner was being taken to work by taxi. The concrete block hit the taxi and killed the driver. The defendants were charged with murder. They said they merely intended to block the road and to frighten the non-striking miner. Following Moloney the judge directed the jury to ask: "Was death or serious injury a natural consequence of what was done? Did a defendant foresee that consequence as a natural consequence?" The jury convicted. The Court of Appeal held that the Moloney guidelines, and the judge's direction in terms of those guidelines, were defective and potentially misleading. Held: The Moloney guidelines were misleading since they omitted any reference to probability. "They also require an explanation that the greater the probability of a consequence the more likely it is that the consequence was foreseen and that if that consequence was foreseen the greater the probability is that that consequence was also intended. But juries also require to be reminded that the decision is theirs to be reached upon a consideration of all the evidence."
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Atkinson [1985] Cr LR 314
1 Mar 1985


Crime
Jury Directions in diminished responsibility case.
1 Citers



 
 Bird, Regina v; CACD 22-Mar-1985 - [1985] EWCA Crim 2; [1985] 2 All ER 513; [1985] 1 WLR 816; (1985) 81 Cr App R 110
 
Lloyd and Another, Regina v [1985] EWCA Crim 1
23 Apr 1985
CACD

Crime

[ Bailii ]
 
Fenning v Hm Advocate [1985] ScotHC HCJAC - 2
3 May 1985
HCJ

Scotland, Crime

[ Bailii ]
 
Clarke, Regina v [1985] UKHL 14; [1985] Crim LR 666; [1985] 3 WLR 113; [1985] 1 AC 1037; 81 Cr App Rep 220; [1985] 2 All ER 777
20 Jun 1985
HL
Scarman, Diplock, Bridge of Harwich, Brandon of Oakwood, Brightman LL
Crime, Immigration
The respondent was arrested by a police officer who mistakenly believed that he was in unlawful possession of a car. He was taken to a police station for questioning but after he had been cleared of that suspicion the police officer told the respondent that he had reason to suspect that he was unlawfully resident in the United Kingdom. The respondent falsely stated that he was born in the United Kingdom, that he was a British subject and that he possessed a British passport. The respondent was arrested as a suspected illegal entrant or resident and charged under s 26(1)(c) of the Immigration Act 1971 with having made a false statement to 'an immigration officer or other person lawfully acting in the execution of [the] Act'. The police officer claimed to be a 'person lawfully acting in the execution of [the] Act'. The respondent was convicted by magistrates but the Crown Court quashed the conviction. An appeal by the Crown to the Divisional Court was dismissed and the Crown appealed to the House of Lords.
Held -- On the true construction of s 26(1)(c) of the 1971 Act a person could only claim to be 'acting in the execution of [the] Act' if he was acting in the performance of a duty imposed by, or in the exercise of a power conferred by, that Act and an offence under s 26(1)(c) was committed only if the false statement was addressed to a person in the course of a specific procedure under the Act in which that person's statutory function involved the obtaining or receipt of information relevant to the performance of that function. Since the police officer had not been acting in the execution of functions conferred on him by or under the 1971 Act when questioning the respondent even though he had reasonable cause to suspect that an offence under the Act had been committed, the officer had not been 'lawfully acting in the execution of [the] Act'. It followed that the Crown's appeal would be dismissed (
Immigration Act 1971 26(1)(c)
[ Bailii ]
 
Kong Cheuk Kwan v The Queen [1985] Crim LR 787; (1986) 82 Cr App R 18; [1985] UKPC 25
10 Jul 1985
PC

Crime
Two hydrofoils collided, causing deaths. The officers were charged with manslaughter. Held: The Board applied to the situation the law which had developed for road traffic accidents.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Libman v The Queen (1985) 21 DLR (4th) 174; 1985 CanLII 51 (SCC)
10 Oct 1985

Dickson CJ and McIntyre, Chouinard, Lamer, Wilson, Le Dain and La Forest JJ
Commonwealth, Crime
CANLII (Supreme Court of Canada) Appellant was committed for trial on seven counts of fraud and one count of conspiracy to commit fraud arising out of the conduct of his Toronto telephone sales solicitation room. Pursuant to appellant's directions, telephone sales personnel telephoned U.S. residents and attempted to induce them to buy shares in two Central American mining companies. Promotional material was mailed from Central America. The sales personnel were directed to make material misrepresentations with respect to their identity, to where they were telephoning from, and to the quality and value of the shares they were selling. As a result of these misrepresentations, a large number of U.S. residents were induced to buy virtually valueless shares in the two mining companies. Their money was sent to Central America, where appellant received his share to take back to Toronto. The accused, by motion, sought to have the committal for trial quashed on the ground that the alleged offences occurred outside Canada, but the motion was refused. An appeal to the Ontario Court of Appeal was dismissed.
Held: The appeal should be dismissed. The counts of fraud on which appellant stood charged could be properly prosecuted in Canada and nothing in the requirements of international comity dictated that Canada not exercise jurisdiction. The conspiracy count could be proceeded with as the fraudulent activities occurred in Canada.
In considering whether a criminal transaction falls outside territorial jurisdiction, account must be taken of all the relevant facts that took place in Canada giving this country an interest in prosecuting the offence and of whether or not anything in those facts offended against international comity. All that is necessary to make an offence subject to the jurisdiction of our courts is that a significant portion of the activities constituting that offence took place in Canada. It is sufficient that there be a "real and substantial link" between an offence and Canada. Sufficient activities preparatory to this fraudulent scheme occurred in Canada to warrant a court's holding that the offence took place in Canada: the scheme was devised here and the whole operation that made it function, including the directing minds and the telephone solicitation, was situated here. The fact that cases where the victims would be harmed outside the country would be caught made no difference. If an accused were prosecuted for the same offence in more than one country, any injustice could be obviated by the pleas of autrefois acquit or autrefois convict. No issue of comity was involved. The interests of other countries are not served by allowing criminals based in this country to prey on their citizens.
1 Citers

[ Canlii ]
 
Regina v Anderson [1986] 2 AC 27
1986
HL
Lord Bridge
Crime
The House considered the mens rea required to establish conspiracy. Lord Bridge said: "[B]eyond the mere fact of agreement, the necessary mens rea of the crime is, in my opinion, established if, and only if, it is shown that the accused, when he entered into the agreement, intended to play some part in the agreed course of conduct in furtherance of the criminal purpose which the agreed course of conduct was intended to achieve. Nothing less will suffice; nothing more is required."
1 Citers



 
 Regina v Roberts; CACD 1986 - [1986] Crim LR 188
 
Houghton v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester [1986] 84 Cr App R 31
1986


Crime, Torts - Other
An off-duty policeman was returning from a fancy dress party in a policeman's uniform, carrying a truncheon. The issue arose in the course as to whether or not that would constitute an offence. Held: The words "reasonable excuse" in section 1(1) were wide enough to enable the off-duty police officer to be not criminally liable under section 1, because he had a "reasonable excuse" for carrying the truncheon.
Prevention of Crime Act 1953 1
1 Citers


 
Regina v Wells Street Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate, Ex parte Westminster City Council [1986] 1 WLR 1046
1986


Planning, Crime
The offence provided in section 9 of contravening section 7 is an offence of strict liability.
Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 7 9


 
 Regina v Renouf; CACD 1986 - [1986] 2 All ER 449; [1986] 1 WLR 522
 
Regina v Navvabi [1986] 1 WLR 1311 CA
1986
CACD

Crime

1 Citers



 
 Lord Advocate's Reference (No 1 of 1985); HCJ 1986 - 1986 JC 137

 
 In Re K (Deceased); CA 1986 - [1986] 1 Ch 180
 
Regina v Rider [1986] 83 CAR 207
1986
CACD

Crime
The defendant had obtained a divorce by forging her husband's signature on the acknowledgment of service and elsewhere, and then swore an affidavit identifying the signature. The only evidence against her on the charge of perjury was her husband's refutation of the signatures. Held: The judge had failed to direct the jury as to section 13 and the need to provide corroboration of the falsity of the statement unless its falsity was admitted. The misdirecion was material but the court applied the proviso to maintain the conviction.
Perjury Act 1911 1 13
1 Citers


 
Regina v Neve (1986) 8 Cr App R (S) 270
1986
CACD

Crime

1 Citers



 
 Attorney-General's Reference (No 1 of 1985); CACD 1986 - [1986] 1 QB 491
 
Regina v Martindale [1986] 84 Cr App R 31
1986
CACD
Lord Lane CJ
Crime
Possession does not depend upon the alleged possessor's powers of memory. Nor does possession come and go as memory revives or fails. "In the judgment of this court [that the argument that lack of memory or knowledge negatives possession is fallacious], it is true that a man does not necessarily possess every article which he may have in his pocket. If for example some evil-minded person secretly slips a portion of cannabis resin into the pocket of another without the other's knowledge, the other is not in law in possession of the cannabis. That scarcely needs stating. But the present situation is different. Here the applicant himself put the cannabis into his wallet knowing what it was and put the wallet into his pocket. In our judgment, subject to the authorities to which reference will have to be made in a moment, he remained in possession even though his memory of the presence of the drug had failed or disappeared altogether. Possession does not depend upon the alleged possessor's powers of memory. Nor does possession come and go as memory revives or fails. If it were to do so, a man with a poor memory would be acquitted. He with the good memory would be convicted."
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Regina v Jones (Terence) (1986) 83 Cr App R 375 CA
1986
CACD

Crime
The trial judge declined to direct the jury that the defendants were entitled to be acquitted if the jury decided that they were indulging in "rough" and undisciplined sport or play, not intending to cause harm, and genuinely believing that the injuries which occurred in the course of the horseplay occurred with the victim's consent.
1 Citers


 
Regina v Goodfellow [1986] 83 Cr App Rep 23
1986
CACD

Crime
The defendant had failed to get re-housed. He planned to burn down his present lodgings, rescuing the other inhabitants. Three died in his attempt. He appealed a conviction for manslaughter. Held: The case was either an unlawful act or Lawrence type case. The appeal failed. In manslaughter by an unlawful act, the jury should be directed that where he did an unlawful act which sober people would see to be dangerous, and death resulted, he would be guilty of manslaughter. In a Lawrence type case, the jury should be directed of the need for him to have foreseen the possibility of injury.
1 Cites

1 Citers



 
 Regina v Howe etc; HL 19-Feb-1986 - [1987] AC 417; [1987] 2 WLR 568; [1986] UKHL 4; (1987) 85 Cr App R 32
 
Regina v Oakes [1986] 1 SCR 103; 1986 CanLII 46 (SCC); 53 OR (2d) 719; 24 CCC (3d) 321; 50 CR (3d) 1; 65 NR 87; [1986] CarswellOnt 95; EYB 1986-67556; [1986] SCJ No 7 (QL); 14 OAC 335; 16 WCB 73; [1986] ACS no 7; 19 CRR 308
28 Feb 1986

Dickson C.J. and Estey, McIntyre, Chouinard, Lamer, Wilson and Le Dain JJ.
Constitutional, Human Rights, Crime
Supreme Court of Canada - Constitutional law -- Charter of Rights -- Presumption of innocence (s. 11(d)) -- Reverse onus clause -- Accused presumed to be trafficker on finding of possession of illicit drug -- Onus on accused to rebut presumption -- Whether or not reverse onus in violation of s. 11(d) of the Charter -- Whether or not reverse onus a reasonable limit to s. 11(d) and justified in a free and democratic society -- Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, ss. 1, 11(d) -- Narcotic Control Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. N-1, ss. 3(1), (2), 4(1), (2), (3), 8.
Criminal law -- Presumption of innocence -- Reverse onus -- Accused presumed to be trafficker on finding of possession of illicit drug -- Onus on accused to rebut presumption -- Whether or not constitutional guarantee of presumption of innocence (s. 11(d) of the Charter) violated.
1 Citers

[ Canlii ]

 
 Regina v Shivpuri; HL 15-May-1986 - [1986] 2 WLR 988; [1986] 1 All ER 334; [1986] UKHL 2; [1987] AC 1
 
Westminster City Council v Croyalgrange Ltd and Another [1986] UKHL 9; (1986) 150 JP 449; [1986] 1 WLR 674; [1986] 2 All ER 353; 84 LGR 801; (1986) 83 Cr App R 155; [1986] Crim LR 693
15 May 1986
HL
Lord Bridge of Harwich, Lord Brightman, Lord Mackay of Clashfern, Lord Ackner, Lord Oliver of Aylmerton
Crime, Local Government
The defendants had been acquitted of running a sex establishment otherwise than in accordance with a licence from the appellant authority. The defendant had leased premises which were known to have been running such, but the defendant director had not been shown to have known that the tenant did not have a licence. The Council said that it having shown the use, no onus lay on the prosecutor to show knowledge of the absence of a licence. Held: The council's appeal failed. "the word "knowingly" in paragraph 20(1 )(a) cannot sensibly have been introduced merely to apply to the use which the defendant is making, or causing or permitting another to make, of premises as a sex establishment. I can conceive of no circumstances in which a person could be said to be using premises, still less of causing or permitting them to be used, "to a significant degree for the exhibition" of pornographic films or "for a business which consists to a significant degree" of the sale of pornographic material if that person were ignorant of the nature of the offending use. If the argument for the council is right, the word "knowingly" is tautologous . . If the argument for the council were accepted, it would lead to the conclusion that paragraph 20(l)(a) had in effect created an offence of strict liability. The offence would consist in the unlawful use of premises as a sex establishment and even an honest belief in facts which, if true, would make the use lawful would afford no defence. It is trite law that the legislature's intention to create an offence of strict liability must be signified by clear language. To find such an intention in paragraph 20(1 )(a) with its iteration of the word "knowingly" is obviously impossible. "
Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982 48 Sch 3
[ Bailii ]
 
Doughty, Regina v [1986] EWCA Crim 1
23 May 1986
CACD

Crime

[ Bailii ]

 
 Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Storkwain; HL 19-Jun-1986 - [1986] 2 All ER 635; (1986) 150 JP 385; [1986] 1 WLR 903; 150 JP 385; [1986] Crim LR 813; [1986] UKHL 13; (1986) 83 Cr App R 359

 
 Regina v Steer; HL 2-Jul-1986 - [1986] UKHL 6; [1987] 2 All ER 833; [1988] AC 111; [1987] 3 WLR 205
 
Regina v Nedrick [1986] 1 WLR 1025; (1986) 8 Cr App R(S); [1986] EWCA Crim 2
10 Jul 1986
CACD
Lord Lane CJ
Crime, Criminal Sentencing
The appellant poured paraffin through the front door of a house and set it alight. In the fire a child died. Held: Lord Lane CJ considered whether a simple direction to the jury on intent to either kill or to do serious bodily harm was adequate and said: "Where the charge is murder and in the rare cases where the simple direction is not enough, the jury should be directed that they are not entitled to infer the necessary intention, unless they feel sure that death or serious bodily harm was a virtual certainty (barring some unforeseen intervention) as a result of the defendant's actions and that the defendant appreciated that such was the case."
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Clouden (1987) CrimLR 56
1987
CACD

Crime
The appellant approached a woman who was carrying a shopping basket in her left hand from behind and wrenched it down and out of her grasp with both hands and ran off with it. He was convicted of robbery. Held: His appeal was dismissed. "The old cases distinguished between force on the actual person and force on the property which in fact causes force on the person but, following Dawson and James, the court should direct attention to the words of the statute without referring to the old authorities. The old distinctions have gone. Whether the defendant used force on any person in order to steal is an issue that should be left to the jury. The judge's direction to the jury was adequate. He told the jury quite clearly at the outset what the statutory definition was, though thereafter he merely used the word 'force' and did not use the expression 'on the person'."
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Regina v Roberts [1987] 78 Cr App R 41
1987
CACD
Lawton LJ
Crime
The court considered the situation which arose when the cases against two defendants charged with conspiracy diverged. Held: "Our reading of the relevant passage in the judgment of Longman's case really comes to this. When a judge has to sum up in a conspiracy case, involving only two accused, he has to make up his mind, on the evidence, whether or not it is possible, as a matter of law, for one of the accused to be convicted and the other acquitted. That must necessarily be a matter for the judge to decide. Once he has decided it, he must direct the jury accordingly. When he comes to decide it, a factor he should keep in mind is whether the two cases are different to a substantial degree; but that is a matter for his assessment and not for the jury's. If it were otherwise, there would be a danger of the jury becoming confused by being invited consider two different approaches to their task. Confusion is liable, in the experience of this court, to lead to inconsistent verdicts."
1 Citers



 
 Regina v Mavji; CACD 1987 - [1987] 84 Cr App R 34; [1987] 2 All ER 758

 
 Attorney-General of Hong Kong v Nai-Keung; PC 1987 - [1987] 1 WLR 1339

 
 Regina v O'Grady; CACD 1987 - [1987] 3 WLR 321; [1987] 1 QB 995
 
Broome v Perkins [1987] Crim LR 271
1987


Crime
The defendant was found guilty despite suffering from hypoglycaemia. He exercised control from time to time and only a total destruction of voluntary control is consistent with automatism.

 
Southwell v Chadwick [1987] 85 Cr App R 235
1987
CACD

Crime
It was a reasonable excuse for a person to have in his possession a machete knife in its scabbard and a catapult for use for killing grey squirrels, so that he could obtain food for his wild birds. The court was mainly concerned as to whether the items found were dangerous per se.
Prevention of Crime Act 1953 1
1 Citers


 
Regina v Sharpe [1987] 1 QB 583
1987


Crime
A member of a gang of robbers sought to establish a defence of duress. The trial judge had directed the jury "but in my judgment the defence of duress is not available to an accused who voluntarily exposes and submits himself to illegal compulsion . . it is not merely a matter of joining in a criminal enterprise; it is a matter of joining in a criminal enterprise of such a nature that the defendant appreciated the nature of the enterprise itself and the attitudes of those in charge of it, so that when he was in fact subjected to compulsion he could fairly be said by a jury to have voluntarily exposed himself and submitted himself to such compulsion."
1 Citers


 
Regina v Nanayakkara [1987] 1 WLR 265; [1987] 1 All ER 650; (1987) 84 Cr App R 125
1987
CACD
Lord Lane CJ
Crime
US Treasury social security orders were stolen in the USA, and brought to London, where they were endorsed at a bank for payment in the USA. Held: On those facts the "acceptance" of the bills could only have taken place in the USA, and therefore there was no jurisdiction to try charges of execution of the bills, by such acceptance, under section 20(2).
Theft Act 1968 20(2)
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Regina v Boswell [1987] 1 WLR 705; [1987] 2 All ER 513
1987
CACD
Leggatt J
Crime
The Court relied on the rule that counsel was entitled, in certain narrowly prescribed circumstances, counsel to brief another counsel to appear on his or own behalf in respect of a costs dispute, to permit counsel in those circumstances to claim costs where that counsel had appeared for himself. It is clear from the statement of reasons by Leggatt J that His Lordship considered that that rule was a necessary added factor which would entitle counsel in that case to avail himself of the statement of the rule in Chorley's case.
1 Citers


 
Regina v White (1987) Crim LR 505
1987


Crime

1 Citers


 
Regina v Kowalski (1987) 86 Cr App R 339
1987
CACD

Crime

1 Citers


 
Hirst and Agu v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire (1987) 85 Cr App R 143
1987
QBD
Glidewell LJ
Crime, Land
The defendants were arrested after distributing leaflets outside a furriers, and appealed against convictions for obstructing the highway. Held: The appeals succeeded. In deciding whether there was a lawful excuse for a technical obstruction of the highway, the Court rejected the test that a use of the highway which was not incidental to passing along it could not give rise to a lawful excuse, and applied the test whether the use of the highway (even though not incidental to passage) was reasonable or not.
Glidewell LJ said: "As counsel pointed out to us in argument, if that is not right, there are a variety of activities which quite commonly go on in the street which may well be the subject of prosecution under section 137. For instance, what is now relatively commonplace, at least in London and large cities, distributing advertising material or free periodicals outside stations, when people are arriving in the morning. Clearly, that is an obstruction; clearly, it is not incidental to passage up and down the street because the distributors are virtually stationary. The question must be: is it a reasonable use of the highway or not? In my judgment that is a question that arises. It may be decided that if the activity grows to an extent that it is unreasonable by reason of the space occupied or the duration of time for which it goes on that an offence would be committed, but it is a matter on the facts for the magistrates. magistrates, in my view.
To take another even more mundane example, suppose two friends meet in the street, not having seen each other for some time, and stop to discuss their holidays and are more or less stationary for a quarter of an hour or 20 minutes. Obviously, they may well cause an obstruction to others passing by. What they are discussing has nothing to do with passing or re-passing in the street. They could just as well have the conversation at the home of one or other of them or in a coffee shop nearby. Is it to be said that they are guilty of an offence and the reasonableness of what they are doing is not in issue? In my judgment it cannot be said.
Some activities which commonly go on in the street are covered by statute, for instance, the holding of markets or street trading, and thus they are lawful activities because they are lawfully permitted within the meaning of the section. That is lawful authority. But many are not and the question thus is (to follow Lord Parker’s dictum): have the prosecution proved in such cases that the defendant was obstructing the highway without lawful excuse? That question is to be answered by deciding whether the activity in which the defendant was engaged was or was not a reasonable use of the highway.
I emphasise that for there to be a lawful excuse for what would otherwise be an obstruction of the highway, the activity in which the person causing the obstruction is engaged must itself be inherently lawful. If it is not, the question whether it is reasonable does not arise. So an obstruction of the highway caused by unlawful picketing in pursuance of a trade dispute cannot be said to be an activity for which there is a lawful excuse. But in this case it is not suggested that the activity itself - distributing pamphlets an displaying banners in opposition to the wearing of animal furs as garments - was itself unlawful."
Highways Act 1980 137(1)
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Regina v Mousir [1987] Crim LR 561
1987
CACD

Crime
The defendant offered money to a 14 year old boy who was on his way home from school to return to his home. The boy continued toward his home, but the defendant committed sexual ssaults on him. Held: The defendant's appeal against attempted abduction was dismissed. Had he persuaded the boy to return with him, he would have been detained in such a way as to constitute an offence under the Act, since he would be kept out of his mother's lawful control.
Child Abduction Act 1984
1 Citers



 
 IPH v Chief Constable of South Wales; QBD 1987 - [1987] Crim LR 42
 
Regina v Reader (1987) 84 Cr App R 294
1987
CACD
Leggatt J
Crime
The offence of absconding whilst on bail has never constituted a contempt of court. Even so it is punishable as if it were contempt.
Bail Act 19767
1 Citers


 
Regina v Cooke [1987] 84 Crim App R 286
1987
CACD

Crime
The defendant faced trial on offences of conspiracy to commit forgery and other related offences. It was alleged that he had made admissions to a police officer in a related case but involving a different defendant. The jury had acquitted the defendant in circumstances which strongly suggested that the police officer had been lying because, in that case too, he had alleged that there had been a confession in interview. The question posed was whether the police officer could be cross-questioned about that earlier acquittal. The judge held that he could not. Held: He had been wrong to reach that conclusion.
1 Citers



 
 Regina v Denton; CACD 1987 - (1987) Cr App R 246

 
 Troughton v Metropolitan Police; QBD 1987 - [1987] Crim LR 138
 
Regina v Tandy [1989] 1 WLR 350; [1987] 87 CAR 45
1987
CACD

Crime
The issue of alcoholism in a murder case may be dealt with solely under diminished responsibility.
Homicide Act 1957 2
1 Citers


 
Regina v Newland (1987) 54 PCR 222; [1987] JPL 851
1987
CACD

Planning, Crime
The appellant, a woman of gypsy stock had been fined for breach of a planning enforcement order. The crown court judge had concluded cursorily that her planning appeal was hopeless and simply designed to frustrate the local authority. By the time the matter reached the appellate court the appeal had been decided in her favour. Held: The appeal succeeded. The judge had been wrong not to grant the application for an adjournment pending the inspector's decision, which could have realistically been expected to be handed down within a matter of weeks. The fine imposed was in any event grossly excessive and a much lower amount was substituted.
1 Citers


 
Regina v Campbell (1987) 84 Cr App R 255
1987


Crime
Given psychiatric evidence given at the trial, the judge should have directed the jury not only on provocation but also on diminished responsibility.
Homicide Act 1957 2
1 Citers



 
 Musa v Le Maitre; QBD 1987 - [1987] FSR 212
 
Regina v Shepherd (1987) 86 Cr App R 47
2 Jan 1987
CACD
Lord Lane CJ, Farquharson and Gatehouse JJ
Crime
The court considered the direction to be given on a defence of duress: "….. where a person has voluntarily, and with knowledge of its nature, joined a criminal organisation or gang which he knew might bring pressure on him to commit an offence and was an active member when he was put under such pressure, he cannot avail himself of the defence of duress." The jury should have been (but were not) directed to consider "whether the appellant could be said to have taken the risk of P's violence simply by joining a shoplifting gang of which he [P] was a member".
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Frankland and Another v Regina [1987] UKPC 3; [1987] UKPC 6
3 Mar 1987
PC
Lord Mackay of Clashfern, Lord Elwyn-Jones, Lord Ackner, Lord Oliver of Aylmerton, Lord Goff of Chieveley
Crime, Commonwealth, Constitutional
Isle of Man - the defendants appealed against their conviction for murder. The Board was asked whether, having regard to all the circumstances of the offence, including the fact of intoxication, the Crown had proved beyond reasonable doubt a murderous intent. Held: The Board considered the status of decisions of English courts in the Isle of Man.
"Decisions of English Courts, particularly decisions of the House of Lords and the Court of Appeal in England, are not binding on Manx Courts, but they are of high persuasive authority, as was correctly pointed out by Sir Iain Glidewell in giving the judgment of the Staff of Government Division, Criminal Jurisdiction. Such decisions should generally be followed unless either there is some provision to the contrary in a Manx statute or there is some clear decision of a Manx Court to the contrary, or, exceptionally, there is some local condition which would give good reason for not following the particular English decision. The persuasive effect of a judgment of the House of Lords, which has largely the same composition as the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, the final Court of Appeal from a Manx Court, is bound to be very high."
[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]

 
 Regina v Maginnis; HL 5-Mar-1987 - [1987] AC 303; [1987] UKHL 4; (1987) 85 Cr App R 127; [1987] 1 All ER 907; [1987] 2 WLR 765
 
Ministere public v Oscar Traen and others C-372/85; R-374/85; [1987] EUECJ R-374/85; [1987] ECR 2141
12 May 1987
ECJ

European, Crime, Environment
Articles 8 to 12 of Directive 75/442 on waste cover all waste-disposal activities and do not impose any limitation relating to the legal status of the operator or the frequency or purpose of the activities concerned. Article 5 of the directive does not lay down any restrictive criteria concerning the "competent ... Authorities to be responsible, in a given zone, for the planning, organization, authorization and supervision of waste-disposal operations" which are to be established or designated by the member states and the latter are therefore unrestricted in their choice of such authorities. The permit provided for in article 8 of the directive is issued by those authorities and cannot be replaced by the consent of the owner or occupier of the land where the waste is discharged . An owner or occupier of land, as an operator tipping his own waste on that land, does not need a permit under article 8 but a measure subjecting him to such a requirement may be adopted as one of the necessary measures to be taken by the member states under article 4 of the directive. Subject to the usual limitations on the exercise of a discretionary power, the power enjoyed by the member states regarding organization of the supervision provided for in article 10 of the directive is qualified only by the requirement that the objectives of that directive, namely protection of human health and of the environment, must be complied with. A directive may not of itself impose obligations on an individual and a provision of a directive may not therefore be relied upon as such against such a person .
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
O'Grady, Regina v [1987] EWCA Crim 2
11 Jun 1987
CACD

Crime

[ Bailii ]

 
 Beckford v The Queen; PC 15-Jun-1987 - [1987] 3 WLR 611; (1987) 85 Cr App R 378; [1987] 3 All ER 425; [1988] 1 AC 130; [1987] UKPC 1; [1987] UKPC 17
 
Regina v Southwood Times, 01 July 1987; [1987] 1 WLR 1361
1 Jul 1987
CACD

Consumer, Crime
Where a car dealer had falsified the odometer on a car he was selling, a disclaimer as to the car's mileage was ineffective to provide a defence under the 1968 Act.
Trade Descriptions Act 1968
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Regina v Gold and Schifreen [1987] QB 1116
17 Jul 1987
CACD
Lord Lane CJ, Leonard and Rose JJ
Crime
The defendants had obtained password and ID information sufficient to secure access to British Telecom's Prestel Service. They appealed against convictions under the 1981 Act after using the access codes to log in. Having gained such access they obtained information to which they were not entitled; made unauthorised alterations to stored data; and caused charges to be made to account-holders without their knowledge or consent. Held: The appeals succeeded.
Lord Lane CJ said: "In our judgment the user segment in the instant case does not carry the necessary two types of message to bring it within the ambit of forgery at all. Moreover, neither the report nor the Act, so it seems to us, seeks to deal with information that is held for a moment whilst automatic checking takes place and is then expunged. That process is not one to which the words 'recorded or stored' can properly be applied, suggesting as they do a degree of continuance.
There is a further difficulty. The prosecution had to prove that the appellants intended that someone should accept as genuine the false instrument which they had made. The suggestion here is that it was a machine (under section 10(3)) which the appellants intended to induce to respond to the false instrument. But the machine (i.e., the user segment) which was intended, so it was said, to be induced seems to be the very thing which was said to be the false instrument (i.e., the user segment) which was inducing the belief. If that is a correct analysis, the prosecution case is reduced to an absurdity.
We have accordingly come to the conclusion that the language of the Act was not intended to apply to the situation which was shown to exist in this case. The submissions at the close of the prosecution case should have succeeded. It is a conclusion which we reach without regret. The Procrustean attempt to force these facts into the language of an Act not designed to fit them produced grave difficulties for both judge and jury which we would not wish to see repeated. The appellants' conduct amounted in essence, as already stated, to dishonestly gaining access to the relevant Prestel data bank by a trick. That is not a criminal offence. If it is thought desirable to make it so, that is a matter for the legislature rather than the courts. We express no view on the matter. Our decision on this aspect of the case makes it unnecessary to determine the other issues raised by the appellants, in particular the submission that they should be found not guilty of forgery when there was no evidence that either of them had any inkling that what they were doing might amount to a contravention of the Act."
Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981
1 Citers


 
Bland, Regina v [1987] EWCA Crim 1
21 Jul 1987
CACD

Crime

[ Bailii ]
 
MC v The United Kingdom [1987] ECHR 33; 11882/85
7 Oct 1987
ECHR
Norgaard P
Human Rights, Employment, Crime
(Commission - Admissibility)
[ Bailii ]
 
Chan Hak-So v The Queen [1987] UKPC 30
2 Nov 1987
PC

Crime
(Hong Kong)
[ Bailii ]
 
Jessop v Stevenson [1987] ScotHC HCJ - 1
13 Nov 1987
HCJ

Crime

[ Bailii ]

 
 Attorney General of Hong Kong v Yip Kai Foon; PC 7-Dec-1987 - [1987] UKPC 35; [1987] UKPC 4; [1988] 1 All ER 15; (1988) 86 Cr App R 368; [1988] AC 642; [1988] 2 WLR 326

 
 Tandy, Regina v; CACD 21-Dec-1987 - [1987] EWCA Crim 5; [1989] 1 WLR 350; (1988) 87 Cr App R 45
 
Regina v Micthell and King [1990] Crim LR 496; (1988) 163 JP 75
1988
CACD
Otton LJ
Crime
The court considered whether the defendants had continued to be involved in a criminal action where they were originally involved, but claimed to have ceased involvement. Held. In considering whether a person had withdrawn, there must usually be some act and not merely a mere mental change of intention or physical change of place by the person contending he had withdrawn. The jury should be directed that they must be satisfied (a) that the fatal injuries were sustained when the joint enterprise was continuing and that the defendant was still acting within that joint enterprise, and (b) that the acts which caused the death were within the scope of the joint enterprise.
1 Citers


 
Regina v McNamara (1988) 87 Cr App R 246
1988
CACD
Lord Lane C.J
Crime
In order to establish possession of a controlled drug the Crown merely had to prove that the appellant had the bag in his possession and that the bag in fact contained a controlled drug, in this case cocaine. Thereafter the burden was cast upon the appellant to bring himself within section 28 and prove, on the balance of probabilities, that he did not know that the bag contained a controlled drug. Section 28(3) would be the basis upon which the appellant, if believed by the jury, could be acquitted in a case where he said that he thought that a cardboard box, which was on his motorcycle, contained pornographic or pirate videos rather than the 20 Kilos of cannabis resin which it in fact contained.
Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 28
1 Citers



 
 In re an Inquiry Under The Company Securities (Insider Dealing) Act 1985; HL 1988 - [1988] AC 660
 
Regina v McHugh (1988) 88 Cr App R 385
1988
CACD

Crime, Company
In cases alleging corporate fraud it is necessary to look very carefully at the nature and limits of the authority before considering whether the questioned transaction is in truth a transaction authorised by the company.
Theft Act 1968
1 Citers


 
McCalla, Regina v [1988] 87 CR App R 372
1988
CACD
May LJ
Crime
A cosh had been found in the glove compartment of the appellant's car. He said he had picked it up a month earlier, had put it away and had forgotten about it. Held: The court reviewed the authorities on what constituted possession. Once someone had or possessed something, he continued to have or possess it until he did something to rid himself of having or possessing it. Merely to have forgotten is not sufficient to exclude him from continuing to have or possess the object. "As to the law as stated in those four cases, one comment must first be made. In those concerning drugs, the consideration is that of possession. In those concerning offensive weapons, it is having them in a public place. To have something with one necessarily requires, we think, closer contact, as it were, with mere possession. Every case of 'having' is one of 'possessing', but it does not necessarily follow that every case of 'possessing' is one of 'having' within the meaning of the relevant statutory provisions. However, for the purposes of the instant case, and having regard to the earlier decisions to which we have referred, in our view, the relevant considerations as to recollection and forgetfulness are the same." and "we are quite satisfied that to have forgotten that one has an offensive weapon in the car that one is driving is not in itself a reasonable excuse under the Act. But when such forgetfulness is coupled with particular circumstances relating to the original acquisition of the article the combination of the original acquisition and the subsequent forgetfulness of possessing it may, given sufficient facts, be a reasonable excuse for having the offensive weapon with one."
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Regina v Hutchins [1988] Crim LR 379
1988
CACD

Crime
The defendant was at a party where he took a range of drugs. He was accused of attacking one girl, and then imprisoning another with a neighbour. He appealed against his convictions for unlawful imprisonment and kidnapping. Held: The appeal was dismissed. For the crime of unlawful imprisonment, mens rea is required even though it is an offence of basic intent, though it can be committed intentionally or being reckless as to the victim's consent.
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Director of Public Prosecutions v Orum [1989] 88 Cr App Rep 261; [1988] 3 All ER 449; [1988] Crim LR 848; [1989] 1 WLR 88; (1988) 153 JP 85
1988

Glidewell LJ, McCullough J
Crime
The court was asked whether a police constable was a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress contrary to s. 5(1)(a) of the Public Order Act 1986. Held: Glidewell LJ discussed the offence under section 5 where words used toward the police officer were the basis of the charge: "I find nothing in the context of the Act of 1986 to persuade me that a police officer may not be a person who is caused harassment, alarm or distress by the various kinds of words and conduct to which section 5(1) applies. I would therefore answer the question in the affirmative, that a police officer can be a person who is likely to be caused harassment and so on. However, that is not to say that the opposite is necessarily the case, namely, it is not to say that every police officer in this situation is to be assumed to be a person who is caused harassment. Very frequently words and behaviour with which police officers will be wearily familiar will have little emotional impact on them save that of boredom. It may well be that, in appropriate circumstances, justices will decide (indeed they might decide in the present case) as a question offact that the words and behaviour were not likely in all the circumstances to cause harassment, alarm or distress to either of the police officers. That is a question of fact for the justices to be decided in all the circumstances, the time, the place, the nature of the words used, who the police officers are, and so on."
McCullough m noted that the amendment to the 1986 Act meant that it was "not the likely physical reaction to the conduct complained of, but the likely mental reaction to it" which now mattered. He added: "It is improbable in the extreme that any police officer would ever be provoked by threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour to cause a breach of the peace, but it is by no means impossible that such an officer may not feel harassed, alarmed or distressed as a result of such words or behaviour. This distinguishes the present case from Marsh v. Arscott."
Public Order Act 1986 5(1)(a)
1 Citers


 
Regina v Osei (1988) 10 Cr App R (S) 289
1988


Crime
The defendant appealed a confiscation order. She was a drug courier armed with a sum of cash to enable her to show that she could support herself in order to enter the country. Held: The word "payment" was apt to cover not merely a profit or fee but also a payment of this kind.
1 Citers


 
Regina v Ashford and Smith (1988) Crim LR 682
1988
CACD

Crime
The defendants tried to cut the wire fence around an American Air Force base to demonstrate their opposition to nuclear weapons. They were charged with possession of an article with intent to damage property. The judge ruled that the purported reason for having the articles did not fall within the definition of a lawful excuse and, therefore, no evidence to that effect could be called. A ground of appeal was that the judge erred. Held: Whether or not an act was done or made in order to protect property belonging to another must be, on the true construction of the statute, an objective test and the judge had ruled correctly.
Criminal Damage Act 1971
1 Citers


 
Director of Public Prosecutions v Marshall [1988] 2 All ER 683
1988


Crime

1 Citers


 
Director of Public Prosecutions v Billington (1988) 87 Cr App R 68
1988


Crime

1 Citers


 
Hughes v Holley [1988] 86 CAR 130
1988

Lord Justice Glidewell
Crime
Lord Justice Glidewell said that behaviour contra bonos mores meant “conduct which has the property of being wrong rather than right in the judgment of the majority of contemporary fellow citizens.”
1 Citers


 
Regina v Gillard (1988) 87 Cr App R 189
1988


Crime
The defendant was guilty of an offence of administering a poison where he sprayed it directly in the victim's face.
Offences against the Person Act 1861 23
1 Citers


 
Regina v O'Loughlin and McLoughlin [1988] 2 All E R 431
1988


Crime

1 Citers


 
Chan Man-sin v The Queen [1988] 1 WLR 196 PC
1988
PC

Commonwealth, Crime

1 Citers


 
Morgentaler v Regina [1988] 1 SCR 30; 1988 CanLII 90 (SCC)
28 Jan 1988

Dickson CJ and Beetz, Estey, McIntyre, Lamer, Wilson and La Forest JJ
Constitutional, Human Rights, Crime, Health Professions
Supreme Court of Canada - Constitutional law -- Charter of Rights -- Life, liberty and security of the person -- Fundamental justice -- Abortion -- Criminal Code prohibiting abortion except where life or health of woman endangered -- Whether or not abortion provisions infringe right to life, liberty and security of the person -- If so, whether or not such infringement in accord with fundamental justice -- Whether or not impugned legislation reasonable and demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society -- Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, ss. 1, 7 -- Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, s. 251.
Constitutional law -- Jurisdiction -- Superior court powers and inter-delegation -- Whether or not therapeutic abortion committees exercising s. 96 court functions -- Whether or not abortion provisions improperly delegate criminal law powers -- Constitution Act, 1867, ss. 91(27), 96.
Constitutional law -- Charter of Rights -- Whether or not Attorney General's right of appeal constitutional -- Costs -- Whether or not prohibition on costs constitutional -- Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, ss. 605, 610(3).
Criminal law -- Abortion -- Criminal Code prohibiting abortion and procuring of abortion except where life or health of woman endangered -- Whether or not abortion provisions ultra vires Parliament -- Whether or not abortion provisions infringe right to life, liberty and security of the person -- If so, whether or not such infringement in accord with fundamental justice -- Whether or not impugned legislation reasonable and demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.
Criminal law -- Juries -- Address to jury advising them to ignore law as stated by judge -- Counsel wrong.
[ Canlii ]

 
 Regina v Governor of Pentonville Prison, Ex Parte Osman; QBD 30-Mar-1988 - [1990] 1 WLR 277
 
Regina v Gold and Schifreen [1988] 2 WLR 984; [1988] AC 1063; [1988] 2 All ER 186
21 Apr 1988
HL
Lord Keith of Kinkel, Lord Brandon of Oakbrook, Lord Templeman, Lord Oliver of Aylmerton and Lord Goff of Chieveley
Crime, Information
The defendants had hacked a remote computer system, by the unauthorised use of the passwords and IDs of other users of the system. The ID and password were immediately cleared by the computer once authorisation for access had been granted. They had been charged under the 1981 Act of uttering a false instrument. The prosecutor now appealed against the decision of the Court of Appeal to quash the conviction. Held: The appeal failed. It was artificial to treat the creation of a temporary record held by the computer as the making of an instrument as defined in section 8(1). The information was held only temporarily and neither recorded nor stored within the Act.
Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981 1 8(1)(d)
1 Cites

[ lip ]

 
 Muller And Others v Switzerland; ECHR 24-May-1988 - 10737/84; [1988] ECHR 5; (1988) 13 EHRR 212
 
Regina v Bray Times, 04 July 1988
4 Jul 1988
CA

Crime

1 Citers



 
 Regina v Conway; CACD 28-Jul-1988 - [1988] EWCA Crim 1; [1989] QB 290
 
Criminal Proceedings Against X (Rec 1988,P 5099) (Judgment) C-228/87
22 Sep 1988
ECJ

European, Crime


 
Salabiaku v France (1988) 13 EHRR 379; 10519/83; [1988] ECHR 19
7 Oct 1988
ECHR
R Ryssdal P
Human Rights, Customs and Excise, Crime
A Zairese national living in Paris, went to the airport to collect, as he said, a parcel of foodstuffs sent from Africa. He could not find this, but was shown a locked trunk, which he was advised to leave alone. He however took possession of it, went through the green customs channel and was detained. The trunk contained cannabis. He was charged with two offences, a criminal offence of illegally importing narcotics and a "customs offence" of smuggling prohibited goods. At trial and on appeal he was acquitted of the former but convicted of smuggling, an offence relating to any act of smuggling or undeclared import: a person in possession of contraband goods "shall be deemed liable for the offence". The accused may exculpate himself by establishing force majeure resulting "from an event responsibility for which is not attributable to him and which it was absolutely impossible for him to avoid". The ‘almost irrebutable presumption’ . . was said to be incompatible with article 6. Held: Contracting States may apply the criminal law to an act where it is not carried out in the normal exercise of one of the rights protected under the Convention, and accordingly, to define the constituent elements in the resulting offence. Contracting States may penalise a simple or objective fact as such, irrespective of whether it results from criminal intent or from negligence. Examples of such offences may be found in the laws of the Contracting States. However, the Applicant was not convicted for mere possession of unlawfully imported prohibited goods. Article 392(1) of the Customs Code does not appear under the heading ‘classification of customs offences’ but under that of ‘criminal liability’. Under this provision a conclusion is drawn from a simple fact, which in itself does not necessarily constitute a petty or a more serious offence, that the ‘criminal liability’ for the unlawful importation of the goods, whether they are prohibited or not, or the failure to declare them, lies with the person in whose possession they are found. It infers therefrom a legal presumption on the basis of which (the French Courts) found the Applicant guilty of smuggling prohibited goods . . This shift from the idea of accountability in criminal law to the notion of guilt shows the very relative nature of such a distinction. It raises a question with regard to Article 6.2 of the Convention. The Convention does not prohibit presumptions of fact in principle, but does require certain limits as regards criminal law. If 6.2 merely laid down a guarantee to be respected by the courts in the conduct of legal proceedings, its requirements would in practice overlap with the duty of impartiality imposed in paragraph 1. Above all, the national legislature would be free to strip the trial court of any genuine power of assessment and deprive the presumption of innocence of its substance, if the words ‘according to law’ were construed exclusively with reference of domestic law. Such a situation could not be reconciled with the object and purpose of Article 6, which, by protecting the right to a fair trial and in particular the right to be presumed innocent, is intended to enshrine the fundamental principle of the rule of law. Article 6.2 does not therefore regard presumptions of fact or of law provided for in the criminal law with indifference. It requires States to confine them within reasonable limits which take into account the importance of what is at stake and maintain the rights of the defence
European Convention on Human Rights 6.2
1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Attorney-General's Reference (No 1 of 1988) Times, 19 October 1988
19 Oct 1988
CACD

Crime, Company
The defendant received price-sensitive information. The Attorney-General appealed his acquittal, the judge having directed the jury that in order to have 'obtained' information within the subsection, he must have carried out some act, that he had expended some effort or acquired the information on purpose. Held: The meaning was wider than as stated by the judge, and included any individual who had obtained information from another. No more was required than to receive the information.
Company Securities (Insider Dealing) Act 1985 1(3)
1 Cites

1 Citers



 
 Regina v Martin (Colin); CACD 29-Nov-1988 - [1989] 1 All ER 652; [1988] 88 Cr App Rep 343; [1988] EWCA Crim 2

 
 Regina v Minors, Regina v Harper; CACD 14-Dec-1988 - [1989] 1 WLR 441 CA

 
 Regina v Conway; 1989 - [1989] QB 290; (1989) 88 Cr App Rep 159
 
Attorney General's Reference (No 1 of 1989) (1989) 11 Cr App R(S) 4109
1989
CACD

Crime

1 Citers


 
Regina v Slack [1989] QB 775
1989


Crime
For a person to be guilty of murder as an accessory it had to be proved that he lent himself to a criminal enterprise involving the infliction of serious injury or death or that he had an express or tacit understanding with the principal that such harm or death should, if necessary, be inflicted.
1 Citers


 
G v Federal Republic of Germany (1989) 60 DR 256
1989
ECHR

Human Rights, Crime
A norm cannot be regarded as a law unless it is formulated with sufficient precision to enable the citizen to foresee, if need be with appropriate advice, the consequences which a given course of conduct may entail. However, the law may be clarified and adapted to new circumstances which can reasonably be brought under the original concept of the offence.
1 Citers



 
 Regina v Hill and Hall; CACD 1989 - [1989] 89 Cr App R 74

 
 Horner v Kingsley Clothing Limited; QBD 1989 - [1989] Crim LR 911
 
Regina v Saraswati (1989) 18 NSWLR 143
1989

Toohey J, McHugh J
Commonwealth, Crime
(Criminal Court of Appeal - New South Wales) The defendant appealed convictions on counts of indecency with a child, the only evidence relied on, in relation to some counts, being evidence of full sexual intercourse. Statutory time limits precluded prosecution for unlawful sexual intercourse and indecent assault. It was held at trial not to be an abuse of process for the prosecution to rely on the evidence of sexual intercourse to establish the charge of indecency Held: (Majority) The High Court applied a "rule that, when a statute specifically deals with a matter and makes it the subject of a condition or limitation, it excludes the right to use a general provision in the same statute to avoid that condition or limitation". The court did not accept that when Parliament amended the relevant Act to criminalise acts of indecency it intended that general power to be used to circumvent the time limit placed on prosecutions under the specifically applicable sections of the same statute.
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Regina v Redford [1989] 89 Cr App R 1
1989
CACD
Lord Lane CJ
Crime
The court considered an allegation of cheating the public revenue. Held: After citing Mavji: "Mr Ashe-Lincoln candidly conceded that if no distinction can be drawn in this context between an act and an omission, to use convenient shorthand, then this appeal fails. His submission was that this, as he would say, crucial, distinction did not fall to be considered in Hudson [1956] 40 Cr App R 55 or indeed in the case of Tonner[1985] 80 Cr.App.R.170 [1985] 1 W.L.R. 344 to which we were referred by counsel for the Crown. No doubt that is right except that in the opinion of this Court the distinction is not crucial and, where it exists, as in the instant case, does not justify a departure from the conclusions reached by the Court of Criminal Appeal in Hudson (supra). In coming to this decision we are influenced by the fact that in none of the cases or authorities such as Hawkins is the distinction between "deceit" involving an act and "non-deceit" involving no more than an omission canvassed or regarded as vital or indeed relevant. The distinction has always been and in our view remains between "frauds affecting the Crown and public at large," to repeat the words of Hawkins, and those which affect only individuals." (Lord Lane CJ)
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Grace v Director of Public Prosecutions [1989] Crim LR 365
1989
QBD
Mann LJ, Auld J
Crime
The court was asked whether an air rifle amounted to a 'lethal' weapon. Held: Allowing the appeal and quashing the convictions, Auld J said that: "the test applied by the justices as to what constituted a firearm within section 57(1) was correct. Their error lay in their approach to determining whether on the evidence before them the prosecution had proved the weapon satisfied the definition. Their inquiry should have involved two issues: (1) whether the weapon was one from which any shot, bullet or other missile could be discharged or whether it could be adapted so as to be made capable of discharging such a missile and (2) if so satisfied, whether it was a lethal barrelled weapon."
. . And: "It could not constitute evidence as to the working or the capacity to work and the capacity or potential capacity to injure or kill of the air rifle in the present case. Expert evidence might not have been necessary. It could have been established by evidence of a witness to the firing of the gun or of someone familiar with such a weapon who could indicate to the court not only that it did work but what its observed effect was when it was fired."
1 Citers


 
Regina v Mackenzie 1989 SLT 121
1989
HCJ
Lord Justice General Emslie
Crime, Scotland

Misiuse of Drugs Act 1971 28(2)
1 Citers


 
Atkin v Director of Public Prosecutions [1989] 89 Cr App R 199
1989
CACD
Taylor LJ
Crime
"The phrase 'uses towards another person' means, in the context of section 4(1)(a) 'uses in the presence of and in the direction of another person directly.'"
Public Order Act 1986 4(1)(a)
1 Citers


 
Regina v Cey (1989) 48 CCC (3d) 480
1989

Gerwing JA, Cameron JA
Crime
Saskatchewan Court of Appeal - The defendant was accused of assault committed during the course of a game of ice hockey. Held: (Majority) The game was very physical, but even so: "some forms of bodily contact carry with them such a high risk of injury and such a distinct probability of serious harm as to be beyond what, in fact, the players commonly consent to, or what, in law, they are capable of consenting to." (Gerwing JA)
Objective criteria are to be used to determine whether the consent defence can applym, including:
(a) the conditions in which the game was played;
(b) the nature and circumstances of the act;
(c) how much force was used;
(d) the victim's injury, and
(e) the state of mind of the accused.
1 Citers



 
 Regina v Philippou; CA 1989 - (1989) 89 Cr App R 290; Times, 06 April 1989
 
Regina v Central Criminal Court ex parte Francis and Francis [1989] 1 AC 347
1989
HL
Lord Griffiths, Lord Goff of Chieveley
Legal Professions, Crime
The police had obtained an ex parte order for the production of files from a firm of solicitors relating to financial transactions of one of their clients. The police believed that the client had been provided with money to purchase property by an alleged drug trafficker. The solicitors relied on the exemption in section 27(4)(ii) that the material to which the order related included 'items subject to legal privilege'. The definition of 'items subject to legal privilege' was to be found in section 10(1) of the 1984 Act. Held: On a purposive construction of section 10(2), the relevant "intention" did not have to belong to the particular person holding the items; rather, if the intention of furthering a criminal purpose were held by anyone, the items would lose their privilege. A drug trafficker with criminal intent could not protect himself by placing his documents in the hands of a solicitor. Privilege belonged to the client, not the solicitor, and a criminal intent disentitled the client to privilege." A solicitor ought to consult his client before relying upon a claim for legal professional privilege for that client's documents. (Lord Griffiths) "I have no doubt that … if an order to give access to documentation is made under section 27, the solicitor-client relationship provides a reasonable excuse within the meaning of the section for the solicitor to take his client's instructions as to whether the order should be contested." Lord Goff: Section 10 expresses, but does not amend or vary, the common law position with regard to legal professional privilege.
The House approved the first part of Glidewell LJ's reasoning in Snaresbrook:- "I have to recognise that . . . my conclusion in the present case undermines part of the reasoning of Glidewell LJ [in the Snaresbrook case]. But it does not necessarily undermine the conclusion of the Divisional Court in that case. This is because I am inclined to agree with Glidewell LJ that the common law principle of legal professional privilege cannot be excluded, by the exception established in R v Cox and Railton 14 QBD 153 in cases where a communication is made by a client to his legal adviser regarding the conduct of his case in criminal or civil proceedings, merely because such communication is untrue and would, if acted upon, lead to the commission of the crime of perjury in such proceedings" (emphasis supplied).
Drug Trafficking Offences Act 1986 27(4)(ii) - Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 10(1) 27(4(1)
1 Cites

1 Citers



 
 Director of Public Prosecutions v Kitching; 1989 - [1990] COD 149; [1990] CLR 394; Times, 17 November 1989
 
Regina v Court [1989] AC 28
1989
HL
Ackner L
Crime
When considering whether an action constituted an indecent assault, the jury was to be asked whether "right-minded persons would consider the conduct indecent or not."
Lord Ackner: "It was common ground before your Lordships, and indeed it is self evident, that the first stage in the proof of the offence is for the prosecution to establish an assault. The "assault" usually relied upon is a battery the species of assault conveniently described by Lord Lane in Faulkner v Talbot [1981] 1 W.L.R. 1528 at 1534 as "any intentional touching of another person without the consent of that person and without lawful excuse. It need not necessarily be hostile or rude or aggressive, as some of the cases seem to indicate."
1 Cites

1 Citers



 
 S v HM Advocate; HCJ 1989 - 1989 SLT 469

 
 Attorney-General's Reference (No 1 of 1988); HL 1989 - [1989] 2 WLR 729
 
Regina v Grundy (1989) 89 Cr App R 333
1989
CACD

Crime
A policeman was attacked on the staircase of someone's home. Grundy arrived within a few seconds and joined in the attack including headbutting the police officer. The assault continued when the police officer was knocked to the ground. It could not be said whether the victim's nose had been broken before or after he had joined the attack. G had argued that the broken nose was the relevant serious injury and the trial judge's directions were that it was the totality of the injury suffered which could amount to grievous bodily harm if the jury so thought and it did not matter that the attack by Grundy's co-defendants began a few seconds before he joined in. Held: Grundy was aiding the commission of the offence as soon as he joined in and there was ample evidence that the police officer sustained grievous bodily harm in the attack in which all three participated.
A person can withdraw until the acts of the principal offender reach the stage of an attempt.
1 Citers


 
Regina v Ciccarelli (1989) 54 CCC (3d) 121
1989
CACD

Crime

1 Citers


 
Regina v Price (Herbert) [1969] 1 QB 541
1989
CACD
Sachs LJ, Fenton Atkinson and Cusack JJ
Crime, Health Professions
A woman went to consult the defendant, a doctor, as she thought she was pregnant and did not wish to have the child. It was common ground that she told the defendant she thought she was some three months pregnant, that she desired not to have the child and that there was talk of going to Harley Street if there was any question of terminating any pregnancy. Although she exhibited most of the classic symptoms of being pregnant the defendant apparently told her that he did not think she was. The defendant suggested that she should be fitted with a Gynekoil, an IUD, according to the defendant, because she was frightened of becoming pregnant, and according to the woman, to procure an abortion. Two days later, the coil was inserted. The following day the woman went to a police surgeon who concluded she was pregnant and would shortly miscarry which she did on the following day, the foetus being some ten weeks old. The defendant was convicted by the jury of using an instrument – the Gynekoil – with intent to procure a miscarriage, contrary to section 58 of the 1861 Act. Held: The judge had misdirected the jury in failing to warn them of the dangers of convicting the defendant on the uncorroborated evidence of the woman – she being in law an accomplice. Sachs LJ: “The essential issue for the jury was, did the defendant at the time that he inserted the Gynekoil with the insertion tube know or believe that [she] was pregnant and accordingly introduce the instrument with intent to produce a miscarriage, or did he, as it was his case for the defence, think that she was not pregnant and introduce it for the purpose of allaying anxieties on her behalf as regards the future.”
1 Citers



 
 Regina v Smith (Ian); CACD 1989 - [1989] 1 WLR 765

 
 Regina v Gamble; 1989 - [1989] NI 268

 
 Regina v Siracusa; 1989 - [1989] 90 Cr App R 340
 
Hennessy, Regina v [1989] EWCA Crim 1
27 Jan 1989
CACD

Crime

[ Bailii ]
 
Roberts v Hamilton [1989] ScotHC HCJ - 1
10 Mar 1989
HCJ

Scotland, Crime

[ Bailii ]
 
Johnson, Regina v [1989] EWCA Crim 289
21 Apr 1989
CACD

Crime

[ Bailii ]
 
Ford v Guild [1989] ScotHC HCJ - 2
18 Oct 1989
HCJ

Scotland, Crime

[ Bailii ]
 
Criminal Proceedings against Nijman R-125/88; [1989] EUECJ R-125/88
7 Nov 1989
ECJ

Agriculture, Crime
Approximation Of Legislation - ational legislation prohibiting the use of a plant-protection product - Measures having equivalent effect.
[ Bailii ]
 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.