

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. Â
		Crime - From: 1999 To: 1999 This page lists 368 cases, and was prepared on 21 May 2019. Â Regina v Abdul Hussain and others [1999] CLR 570 1999 CA Crime The judge had been wrong to refused to leave the defence of necessity to the jury. The court gave guidance as to the proper approach. The judge should have asked himself whether there was evidence of such fear operating on the mind of the defendant at the time of the alleged offending as to impel him to act as he did, and whether if so there was evidence that the danger he feared objectively existed, and that the alleged offending was a reasonable and proportionate response to it. 1 Citers Â B (A Minor) v Director of Public Prosecutions [1999] 3 WLR 116 1999 QBD Brooke LJ, Tucker and Rougier JJ Crime Rougier J: "Though any violation of a child's innocence attracts very grave stigma, yet the protection of children from sexual abuse is a social and moral imperative." 1 Citers Â Adams v Her Majesty's Advocate [1999] ScotHC 1 6 Jan 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General Crime, Scotland [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Emslie v Her Majesty's Advocate [1999] ScotHC 2 7 Jan 1999 HCJ Lord Prosser Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Wallace v Her Majesty's Advocate [1999] ScotHC 4 7 Jan 1999 HCJ Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Govell v Her Majesty's Advocate [1999] ScotHC 3 7 Jan 1999 HCJ Lord McCluskey Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Cassidy v Her Maejsty's Advocate [1999] ScotHC 5 8 Jan 1999 HCJ Lord Prosser Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Director of Public Prosecutions v Chipping [1999] EWHC Admin 11 11 Jan 1999 Admn Buxton LJ, Collins j Crime The defendant appealed saying that the prosecution of him in connection with an incident outside a night club had been undertaken without disclosure of CCTV tape. Public Order Act 1986 4 - Police Act 1986 89 [ Bailii ] Â Kenneth William Milton v Procurator Fiscal, Perth 12 Jan 1999 HCJ Lord Prosser Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Cameron Mccartney v Procurator Fiscal, Inverness [1999] ScotHC 7 13 Jan 1999 HCJ Lord Prosser Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Ricky Brouwer v Procurator Fiscal, Perth 13 Jan 1999 HCJ Lord Prosser Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Michael Edward Taggart v Procurator Fiscal, Paisley [1999] ScotHC 9 13 Jan 1999 HCJ Lord Prosser Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Darren O'Brien v Procurator Fiscal, Linlithgow [1999] ScotHC 8 13 Jan 1999 HCJ Lord Prosser Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Robert William Lindsay Gordon v Procurator Fiscal, Cupar [1999] ScotHC 12 14 Jan 1999 HCJ Lord McCluskey Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Unity Fr 165 Limited v Stephen Bellany v Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food [1999] EWHC Admin 32 14 Jan 1999 Admn European, Agriculture, Crime [ Bailii ] Â Andrew John Grant Scott and Derek Alexander Keith v Procurator Fiscal, Perth 14 Jan 1999 HCJ Lord McCluskey Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Johnson, Regina v [1999] EWCA Crim 41 14 Jan 1999 CACD Crime [ Bailii ] Â Al-Zubeidi, R v [1999] EWCA Crim 81 18 Jan 1999 CACD Crime [ Bailii ] Â Mehr, R v [1999] EWCA Crim 97 19 Jan 1999 CACD Crime [ Bailii ] Â Â Taylor v Procurator Fiscal, Edinburgh; HCJ 22-Jan-1999 - [1999] ScotHC 13 Â Tate Wilson Paterson v Robert Ferguson Lees 22 Jan 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Â Regina v Lalani; CACD 22-Jan-1999 - Times, 28 January 1999; Gazette, 17 February 1999; [1999] EWCA Crim 130 Â Andrew Thompson v Frank Crowe, Procurator Fiscal, Hamilton 23 Jan 1999 HCJ Lord Justice Clerk Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Don Ian Aaron McNaughton v Procurator Fiscal, Falkirk 26 Jan 1999 HCJ Lord Prosser Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Lawrence Kerrigan v Procurator Fiscal, Kilmarnock 26 Jan 1999 HCJ Lord Prosser Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Gerald William Ambrose v Procurator Fiscal, Ayr 26 Jan 1999 HCJ Lord Prosser Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Gillies v Procurator Fiscal, Glasgow [1999] ScotHC 16 26 Jan 1999 HCJ Lord Prosser Crime [ Bailii ] Â Steven Dailly v Procurator Fiscal, Paisley 26 Jan 1999 HCJ Lord Prosser Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â White v Procurator Fiscal, Perth 27 Jan 1999 HCJ Lord Prosser Scotland, Crime The defendant challenged his conviction for supplying false information on applying for a shotgun certificate. He had said that he had no convictions, but failed to disclose an adminishment, refusing to add the case to the application, having explained to the constable that he had not been convicted. Held: "There may have been an error in law in not appreciating that a conviction such as this was a conviction but we are satisfied that this was a false statement made by the appellant and that there was corroboration." Firearms Act 1968 26(5) [ ScotC ] Â David Pole v Procurator Fiscal, Dundee 27 Jan 1999 HCJ Lord Prosser Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Angus Hamilton v Procurator Fiscal, Glasgow 27 Jan 1999 HCJ Lord Prosser Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Morrow v Procurator Fiscal, Lanark [1999] ScotHC 23 27 Jan 1999 HCJ Lord Prosser Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Regina v Egan [1998] 1 Cr App R 121; [1999] EWCA Crim 188 29 Jan 1999 CACD Crime 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Â Regina v Law; CACD 1-Feb-1999 - [1999] Crim LR 837; [1999] EWCA Crim 210 Â Â Regina v Lubega; CACD 1-Feb-1999 - Times, 10 February 1999; [1999] EWCA Crim 215 Â Â Regina v Manchester Crown Court ex parte Rogers (Legal Professional Privilege); Admn 2-Feb-1999 - Times, 15 February 1999; Gazette, 10 March 1999; [1999] EWHC Admin 94; [1999] 1 WLR 832 Â Thomas Hunter v Her Majesty's Advocate 3 Feb 1999 HCJ Lord Caplan and Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Kingarth Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Peter Cockburn Smith v Her Majesty's Advocate [1999] ScotHC 25 3 Feb 1999 HCJ Lord Caplan and Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Philip Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Â Regina v Law; CACD 4-Feb-1999 - Times, 04 February 1999 Â Regina v Aspinall Gazette, 17 February 1999; Times, 04 February 1999; [1999] EWCA Crim 185 4 Feb 1999 CACD Criminal Practice, Crime A known schizophrenic even though certified probably fit for interview should nevertheless have present with him in interview at a police station an appropriate adult. Assessment of such an individual is beyond the skills of a custody sergeant. Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 [ Bailii ] Â David John Tulewicz v Procurator Fiscal, Kirkcaldy 9 Feb 1999 HCJ Lord Caplan and Lord Allanbridge and Lord Cowie Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Robert Graham Mckernon v Procurator Fiscal, Glasgow 9 Feb 1999 HCJ Lord Allanbridge and Lord Caplan and Lord Cowie Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Stephen Peter Moar v Procurator Fiscal, Stornoway 9 Feb 1999 HCJ Lord Allanbridge and Lord Caplan and Lord Cowie Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Â Regina v Bowden (BT); CACD 10-Feb-1999 - Gazette, 10 March 1999; Times, 25 February 1999; [1999] EWCA Crim 331; [1999] 1 WLR 823; [1999] 4 All ER 43; (1999) 163 JP 337; [1999] 2 Cr App R 176 Â Regina v T Times, 12 February 1999 12 Feb 1999 CACD Crime The offence of possessing an indecent image of a child with intention of displaying it is not committed by the defendant showing it himself. Â Regina v Clarke, Hewins [1999] EWCA Crim 386; 97/4882-3/W3 15 Feb 1999 CACD Crime A witness had the interviews of a co-defendant (as well as letters of which she was neither the writer nor the recipient) put into her hands for day after day so that the assertion could be made time without number that the assertions in those inadmissible documents were true, and the defendant's evidence to the contrary was false. Held: Her appeal succeeded. The court considered the cross examination of a defendant on a document admissible against co-accused, but not against himself. 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â David Barr v Her Majesty's Advocate 16 Feb 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Justice General and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Petition To the Nobile Officium by Potter v Procurator Fiscal, Glasgow 18 Feb 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord Sutherland and Lord Coulsfield Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Regina v Weekes Gazette, 21 April 1999; [1999] EWCA Crim 453 18 Feb 1999 CACD Criminal Practice, Crime The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder saying that at the time of the offence he suffered a paranoid psychotic illness which would have substantially impaired his mental responsibility for his acts. He was not regarded as insane as defined by the M’Naghton rules. He had been advised that he might have a defence to the murder charge as such, but had instructed his defence team not to advance it. Held: It is for the defence to establish, if pleaded, a defence of diminished responsibility. "There have been a number of cases in which this court has been faced by the difficulties which arise when a defendant chooses not to call evidence at trial and then wishes to call that evidence on appeal. In general applications to that effect are rejected on the basis that a defendant must put forward his whole case at trial and that it is not in the interests of justice to permit him to put forward his case with different evidence before different tribunals. If in a particular case that results in a conviction which he could have avoided by leading the appropriate evidence at the appropriate time then that is the price he must pay for having chosen not to lead that evidence at the appropriate time. " The Court has the power to substitute a conviction for manslaughter for one of murder, where the defendant's own mental condition had led him to gainsay counsel's advice, and to refuse to allow a plea of diminished responsibility to be put forward. Homicide Act 1957 2 - Criminal Appeal Act 1968 23 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â W v Chief Constable of Sussex Police [1999] EWCA Civ 824 18 Feb 1999 CA Health Professions, Crime [ Bailii ] Â Gayle, R v [1999] EWCA Crim 450 18 Feb 1999 CACD Crime [ Bailii ] Â Alexandrina Brannigan v Her Majesty's Advocate 22 Feb 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Â Regina v Cairns; CACD 22-Feb-1999 - Gazette, 17 March 1999; Times, 05 April 1999; [1999] EWCA Crim 468 Â Graeme William Main v Procurator Fiscal, Cupar [1999] ScotHC 36 23 Feb 1999 HCJ Lord Kirkwood and Lord Prosser and Lord Weir Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Kenneth Anthony Paton Mills v Her Majesty's Advocate 23 Feb 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Ross Mcintosh v Procurator Fiscal, Dunfermline 23 Feb 1999 HCJ Lord Kirkwood and Lord Prosser and Lord Weir Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Ian Muir v Procurator Fiscal, Edinburgh 23 Feb 1999 HCJ Lord Kirkwood and Lord Prosser and Lord Weir Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Brian Alexander v Procurator Fiscal, Dunferline 23 Feb 1999 HCJ Lord Kirkwood and Lord Prosser and Lord Weir Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Garrow v Her Majesty's Advocate [1999] ScotHC 37 23 Feb 1999 ScHC Lord Justice General Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â William Boyle v Procurator Fiscal, Stirling 23 Feb 1999 HCJ Lord Kirkwood and Lord Prosser and Lord Weir Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Patrick Stewart v Procurator Fiscal, Hamilton 24 Feb 1999 HCJ Lord Kirkwood and Lord Prosser and Lord Weir Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Ian Mcnaughton v Procurator Fiscal, Paisley 24 Feb 1999 HCJ Lord Kirkwood and Lord Prosser and Lord Weir Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Derek Gavin Hoy v Her Majesty's Advocate 25 Feb 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Coughlan, Regina v [1999] EWCA Crim 553 2 Mar 1999 CACD Crime [ Bailii ] Â David Gordon Robb v Her Majesty's Advocate 2 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Eassie and Lord Morison Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Jason Dickson Thomson v Her Majesty's Advocate 3 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Eassie and Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Morison Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Â Director of Public Prosecutions v Jones and Lloyd; HL 4-Mar-1999 - Times, 05 March 1999; Gazette, 17 March 1999; Gazette, 31 March 1999; [1999] 2 AC 240; [1999] UKHL 5; [1999] 2 WLR 625; [1999] 2 All ER 257; (1999) 6 BHRC 513; (1999) 3 CHRLD 4 Â Derek Alexander Mccreaddie v Her Majesty's Advocate 5 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Philip Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â James Geddes Jack v Her Majesty's Advocate 5 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Philip Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Â Chinyamunzore v Director of Public Prosecutions; Admn 8-Mar-1999 - [1999] EWHC Admin 209 Â Gerald Niven v Procurator Fiscal, Dundee 9 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Kirkwood and Lord Milligan and Lord Prosser Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â King v Her Majesty's Advocate [1999] ScotHC 51 9 Mar 1999 HCJ ord Justice General and Lord Coulsfield and Lord Sutherland Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Vicky Roy Thomson Skirving v Procurator Fiscal, Cupar [1999] ScotHC 54 9 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Kirkwood and Lord Milligan and Lord Prosser Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Lewis Morrison Gray v Procurator Fiscal, Kirkcaldy 9 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Kirkwood and Lord Milligan and Lord Prosser Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Jarvis Orme v Procurator Fiscal, Linlithgow [1999] ScotHC 50 9 Mar 1999 ScHC Lord Kirkwood and Lord Milligan and Lord Prosser Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Kabasele George Kabalu v Her Majesty's Advocate 10 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Abernethy and Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Philip Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Andrea McAllan v Her Majesty's Advocate 10 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Caplan and Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Kingarth Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â James Andrew Aitchison v Procurator Fiscal, Linlithgow [1999] ScotHC 56 10 Mar 1999 ScHC Lord Kirkwood and Lord Prosser and Lord Milligan Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â James Anthony Daly v Procurator Fiscal, Glasgow [1999] ScotHC 57 10 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Kirkwood and Lord Milligan and Lord Prosser Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Richard Wilhelm Karling v Her Majesty's Advocate 10 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Kirkwood and Lord Cowie Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Sion Thomas Bailly v Procurator Fiscal, Edinburgh 10 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Kirkwood and Lord Milligan and Lord Prosser Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Terence Jozef Collins v Her Majesty's Advocate 10 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Abernethy and Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Philip Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â The Queen v Lee William Clegg [1999] NICC 1908 11 Mar 1999 CCNI Northern Ireland, Crime [ Bailii ] Â Crown Appeal By the Rt Hon Lord Hardie, Her Majesty's Advocate v Kevin Ian Wallace 11 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Justice Clerk Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Kevin Keegan and Kevin Mcmullen and Robert Mclean v Procurator Fiscal, Paisley [1999] ScotHC 66 12 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Caplan and Lord Cowie and Lord Allanbridge Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Alan Herd v Her Majesty's Advocate 12 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Marnoch and Lord Prosser and Lord Weir Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â David Scott v Procurator Fiscal, Paisley 12 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Kirkwood and Lord Weir and Lord Prosser Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Regina v Manchester Crown Court ex parte Bailey; Annal and Hadfield [1999] EWHC Admin 223 12 Mar 1999 Admn Crime [ Bailii ] Â Terry Kennedy v Her Majesty's Advocate 16 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Sutherland and Lord Justice General and Lord Coulsfield Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Rodger Or Houghton v Her Majesty's Advocate [1999] ScotHC 67 16 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord Coulsfield and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Philip Paul Lumsden v Her Majesty's Advocate 16 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord Coulsfield and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Attorney General's Reference No 1 of 1999 (Colin Stewart Newberry) Times, 06 July 1999; Gazette, 30 June 1999; [1999] EWCA Crim 722; [1999] EWCA Crim 1589 16 Mar 1999 CACD Crime The offence of witness intimidation was committed by a defendant, even though the threats were made by a third party on his behalf, provided the threat was intended by the accused to be passed to the witness, and provided the other elements of the offence were present. Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 51(1) [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Kirsty Aird v Procurator Fiscal, Glasgow 17 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Kirkwood and Lord Prosser and Lord Weir Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â James Joseph Hamill and James Burns Gemill v Her Majesty's Advocate 17 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Caplan and Lord Philip Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â In Petition To the Nobile Officium v By William Moscrop [1999] ScotHC 70 17 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Justice General and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Ahnee, Selvon and Le Mauricien Ltd v Director of Public Prosecutions [1999] UKPC 11; (Appeal No 28 of 1998) 17 Mar 1999 PC Commonwealth, Crime, Media PC Mauritius PC Mauritius [ Bailii ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ] Â Patrick, R v [1999] EWCA Crim 746 18 Mar 1999 CACD Crime [ Bailii ] Â Brock, R v [1999] EWCA Crim 756 18 Mar 1999 CACD Crime [ Bailii ] Â Kevin Keavney v Her Majesty's Advocate 18 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord Sutherland and Lord Coulsfield Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â James Anthony Mack v Her Majesty's Advocate 23 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Caplan and Lord Justice Clerk Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Her Majesty's Advocate v Roose [1999] ScotHC 74 23 Mar 1999 HCJ Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Paterson v Procurator Fiscal, Stirling [1999] ScotHC 76 24 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Caplan and Lord Morison Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Regina v Bartle and Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Others, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte; Regina v Evans and Similar (No 3) Gazette, 28 April 1999; [1999] UKHL 147; [2000] 1 AC 147; [1999] 2 WLR 825; [1999] 2 All ER 97 24 Mar 1999 HL Lord Browne-Wilkinson, Lord Goff of Chieveley Extradition, Crime An application to extradite a former head of state for an offence which was not at the time an offence under English law would fail, but could proceed in respect of allegations of acts after that time. No immunity was intended for heads of state. International law prohibiting torture has the character of jus cogens or a peremptory norm: "the jus cogens nature of the international crime of torture justifies states in taking universal jurisdiction over torture wherever committed. International law provides that offences jus cogens may be punished by any state because the offenders are "common enemies of all mankind and all nations have an equal interest in their apprehension and prosecution:" Demjanjuk v Petrovsky (1985) 603 F.supp. 1468" and Lord Browne-Wilkinson: "It is a basic principle of international law that one sovereign state (the forum state) does not adjudicate on the conduct of a foreign state. The foreign state is entitled to procedural immunity from the process of the forum state. This immunity extends to both criminal and civil liability. State immunity probably grew from the historical immunity of the person of the monarch. In any event, such personal immunity of a head of state persist to the present day; a head of state is entitled to the same immunity as the state itself" International Convention Against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment 1984 (1990) Cm 1775 - State Immunity Act 1978 - Extradition Act 1989 1 Cites 1 Citers [ House of Lords ] - [ Bailii ] Â Glen Stewart Ogilvie v Her Majesty's Advocate 25 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Caplan and Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Morison Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Attorney-General's Reference No 3 of 1998 Times, 10 May 1999; Gazette, 12 May 1999; [1999] 3 WLR 1194; [1999] EWCA Crim 835; [1999] 2 Cr App 214 25 Mar 1999 CACD Judge LJ Crime Where a defendant had been insane at the time of a burglary but was fit at the time of trial a court examining his actions under the Act was required to look only to the actions and need not enquire as to the presence of any mental element. Trial of Lunatics Act 1883 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â James Anthony Mack v Her Majesty's Advocate 25 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Caplan and Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Morison Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â In re Devine [1999] NIJB 128; [1999] NIQB 7 26 Mar 1999 QBNI Coghlin J Northern Ireland, Crime Application for judicial review of appointment of a financial investigator [ Bailii ] Â Crabb v Her Majesty's Advocate 30 Mar 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord Milligan and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Marie Kelly Kerr Ingram v Her Majesty's Advocate [1999] ScotHC 80 31 Mar 1999 ScHC Lord Justice General and Lord Milligan and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Â Regina v Baker and Ward; CACD 31-Mar-1999 - Times, 28 April 1999; [1999] EWCA Crim 913; [1999] 2 Cr App R 335 Â Mark Robert Birrell and Gordon Williamson and Paul Williamson and Lawrence Milligan v Her Majesty's Advocate [1999] ScotHC 83 1 Apr 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord Coulsfield and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â James Thomason Diamond v Her Majesty's Advocate 1 Apr 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Justice General and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Ian Jack Whyte v Her Majesty's Advocate 1 Apr 1999 HCJ Lord Gill and Lord Justice General and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Paul Cowan and Jennifer Margaret Rennie and Patricia Elaine Blair and Alan Robert Simpson v Her Majesty's Advocate and Procurator Fiscal, Stranraer and Procurator Fiscal, Greenock and Procurator Fiscal, Glasgow [1999] ScotHC 84 1 Apr 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord Coulsfield and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Prosecutor v Furundzija [1998] ICTY 3; (1998) 38 ILM 317 1 Apr 1999 Crime, Human Rights (International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia) The court described the main features of the law against torture: "There exists today universal revulsion against torture: as a USA Court put it in Filartiga v. Peña-Irala, 'the torturer has become, like the pirate and the slave trader before him, hostis humani generis, an enemy of all mankind'. This revulsion, as well as the importance States attach to the eradication of torture, has led to the cluster of treaty and customary rules on torture acquiring a particularly high status in the international normative system, a status similar to that of principles such as those prohibiting genocide, slavery, racial discrimination, aggression, the acquisition of territory by force and the forcible suppression of the right of peoples to self-determination. The prohibition against torture exhibits three important features, which are probably held in common with the other general principles protecting fundamental human rights. The Prohibition Even Covers Potential Breaches. Firstly, given the importance that the international community attaches to the protection of individuals from torture, the prohibition against torture is particularly stringent and sweeping. States are obliged not only to prohibit and punish torture, but also to forestall its occurrence: it is insufficient merely to intervene after the infliction of torture, when the physical or moral integrity of human beings has already been irremediably harmed. Consequently, States are bound to put in place all those measures that may pre-empt the perpetration of torture. As was authoritatively held by the European Court of Human Rights in Soering, international law intends to bar not only actual breaches but also potential breaches of the prohibition against torture (as well as any inhuman and degrading treatment). It follows that international rules prohibit not only torture but also (i) the failure to adopt the national measures necessary for implementing the prohibition and (ii) the maintenance in force or passage of laws which are contrary to the prohibition. Let us consider these two aspects separately. Normally States, when they undertake international obligations through treaties or customary rules, adopt all the legislative and administrative measures necessary for implementing such obligations. However, subject to obvious exceptions, failure to pass the required implementing legislation has only a potential effect: the wrongful fact occurs only when administrative or judicial measures are taken which, being contrary to international rules due to the lack of implementing legislation, generate State responsibility. By contrast, in the case of torture, the requirement that States expeditiously institute national implementing measures is an integral part of the international obligation to prohibit this practice. Consequently, States must immediately set in motion all those procedures and measures that may make it possible, within their municipal legal system, to forestall any act of torture or expeditiously put an end to any torture that is occurring. Another facet of the same legal effect must be emphasised. Normally, the maintenance or passage of national legislation inconsistent with international rules generates State responsibility and consequently gives rise to a corresponding claim for cessation and reparation (lato sensu) only when such legislation is concretely applied. By contrast, in the case of torture, the mere fact of keeping in force or passing legislation contrary to the international prohibition of torture generates international State responsibility. The value of freedom from torture is so great that it becomes imperative to preclude any national legislative act authorising or condoning torture or at any rate capable of bringing about this effect. The Prohibition Imposes Obligations Erga Omnes. Furthermore, the prohibition of torture imposes upon States obligations erga omnes, that is, obligations owed towards all the other members of the international community, each of which then has a correlative right. In addition, the violation of such an obligation simultaneously constitutes a breach of the correlative right of all members of the international community and gives rise to a claim for compliance accruing to each and every member, which then has the right to insist on fulfilment of the obligation or in any case to call for the breach to be discontinued. Where there exist international bodies charged with impartially monitoring compliance with treaty provisions on torture, these bodies enjoy priority over individual States in establishing whether a certain State has taken all the necessary measures to prevent and punish torture and, if they have not, in calling upon that State to fulfil its international obligations. The existence of such international mechanisms makes it possible for compliance with international law to be ensured in a neutral and impartial manner. The Prohibition Has Acquired the Status of Jus Cogens. While the erga omnes nature just mentioned appertains to the area of international enforcement (lato sensu), the other major feature of the principle proscribing torture relates to the hierarchy of rules in the international normative order. Because of the importance of the values it protects, this principle has evolved into a peremptory norm or jus cogens, that is, a norm that enjoys a higher rank in the international hierarchy than treaty law and even 'ordinary' customary rules. The most conspicuous consequence of this higher rank is that the principle at issue cannot be derogated from by States through international treaties or local or special customs or even general customary rules not endowed with the same normative force. Clearly, the jus cogens nature of the prohibition against torture articulates the notion that the prohibition has now become one of the most fundamental standards of the international community. Furthermore, this prohibition is designed to produce a deterrent effect, in that it signals to all members of the international community and the individuals over whom they wield authority that the prohibition of torture is an absolute value from which nobody must deviate. The fact that torture is prohibited by a peremptory norm of international law has other effects at the inter-state and individual levels. At the inter-state level, it serves to internationally de-legitimise any legislative, administrative or judicial act authorising torture. It would be senseless to argue, on the one hand, that on account of the jus cogens value of the prohibition against torture, treaties or customary rules providing for torture would be null and void ab initio, and then be unmindful of a State say, taking national measures authorising or condoning torture or absolving its perpetrators through an amnesty law. If such a situation were to arise, the national measures, violating the general principle and any relevant treaty provision, would produce the legal effects discussed above and in addition would not be accorded international legal recognition. Proceedings could be initiated by potential victims if they had locus standi before a competent international or national judicial body with a view to asking it to hold the national measure to be internationally unlawful; or the victim could bring a civil suit for damage in a foreign court, which would therefore be asked inter alia to disregard the legal value of the national authorising act. What is even more important is that perpetrators of torture acting upon or benefiting from those national measures may nevertheless be held criminally responsible for torture, whether in a foreign State, or in their own State under a subsequent regime. In short, in spite of possible national authorisation by legislative or judicial bodies to violate the principle banning torture, individuals remain bound to comply with that principle. As the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg put it: 'individuals have international duties which transcend the national obligations of obedience imposed by the individual State'. Furthermore, at the individual level, that is, that of criminal liability, it would seem that one of the consequences of the jus cogens character bestowed by the international community upon the prohibition of torture is that every State is entitled to investigate, prosecute and punish or extradite individuals accused of torture, who are present in a territory under its jurisdiction. Indeed, it would be inconsistent on the one hand to prohibit torture to such an extent as to restrict the normally unfettered treaty-making power of sovereign States, and on the other hand bar States from prosecuting and punishing those torturers who have engaged in this odious practice abroad. This legal basis for States' universal jurisdiction over torture bears out and strengthens the legal foundation for such jurisdiction found by other courts in the inherently universal character of the crime. It has been held that international crimes being universally condemned wherever they occur, every State has the right to prosecute and punish the authors of such crimes. As stated in general terms by the Supreme Court of Israel in Eichmann, and echoed by a USA court in Demjanjuk, 'it is the universal character of the crimes in question ie. international crimes which vests in every State the authority to try and punish those who participated in their commission'. It would seem that other consequences include the fact that torture may not be covered by a statute of limitations, and must not be excluded from extradition under any political offence exemption." 1 Cites 1 Citers Â Jaspal Singh v Director of Public Prosecutions [1999] EWHC Admin 301 14 Apr 1999 Admn Crime [ Bailii ] Â Graham Munro v Her Majesty's Advocate 15 Apr 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Justice General and Lord Kingarth Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Â Lang, Regina v; CACD 15-Apr-1999 - [1999] EWCA Crim 986 Â Â Regina v Gingell; CACD 16-Apr-1999 - Times, 21 May 1999; Gazette, 12 May 1999; [1999] EWCA Crim 1025 Â Lincolnshire County Council v Safeway Stores Plc [1999] EWHC Admin 318 19 Apr 1999 Admn Crime, Consumer Appeal against conviction for selling food after sell by date. Food Safety Act 1990 16(1)(e) - e Food Labelling Regulations 1996 (1996 No. 1499) 44 [ Bailii ] Â Gordon John Reid v Her Majesty's Advocate 20 Apr 1999 HCJ Lord Justice Clerk Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Robert Malcolm Bain v Her Majesty's Advocate 20 Apr 1999 HCJ Lord Justice Clerk Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Andrea McAllan v Her Majesty's Advocate 21 Apr 1999 HCJ Lord Allanbridge and Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Nimmo Smith Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â John Harrison v Her Majesty's Advocate 21 Apr 1999 HCJ Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Allanbridge and Lord Nimmo Smith Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â James Joseph Hamill v Her Majesty's Advocate 21 Apr 1999 HCJ Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Allanbridge and Lord Nimmo Smith Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Her Majesty's Advocate v Glen Foley [1999] ScotHC 91 22 Apr 1999 HCJ Lord Justice Clerk Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Cletus Timothy, Dexter Reid and Sheldon Lewis v The State [1999] UKPC 19; Appeal No 18 of 1998 22 Apr 1999 PC Lord Slynn of Hadley, Lord Clyde, Lord Hutton, Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough, Sir Patrick Russell Crime PC (Trinidad and Tobago) The defendants appealed their convictions for murder. They asserted that the police had extracted confessions by torture, and that other evidence had been obtained by oppression. Held: "the issue of whether the alleged conduct of Timothy and Reid in taking Sergeant David to the galvanise in the garden and showing him the guns was voluntary should have been decided by the judge on the voir dire. The conduct which is relied on followed on from such violence as the judge accepted was sufficient to make it necessary to exclude the written confession. The issue as to whether the prosecution had established that their conduct in taking Sergeant David to the galvanise and showing him the guns was done voluntarily fell to be decided just as much as the issue whether the written statements were voluntary." The evidence recovered as a result of the oppression should not hanve been admitted, and it would not be possible to apply the proviso, and the conictions were quashed. 1 Cites [ Bailii ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ] Â In Petition To the Nobile Officium By Alan Scott Mcneilage v Her Majesty's Advocate 23 Apr 1999 HCJ Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Allanbridge and Lord Nimmo Smith Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Euan Alexander Mcilvride and Michael Mcgarry Mcletchie v Her Majesty's Advocate 23 Apr 1999 HCJ Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Eassie and Lord Morison Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council v Henley Foundries [1999] EWHC Admin 356 26 Apr 1999 Admn Kennedy LJ, Mithell J Crime Environmental Protection Act 1990 [ Bailii ] Â John Paul Cameron v Her Majesty's Advocate [1999] ScotHC 254 26 Apr 1999 HCJ Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] Â Weston John Ross Venters v Her Majesty's Advocate [1999] ScotHC 93 28 Apr 1999 HCJ Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Eassie and Lord Morison Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Duff v Procurator Fiscal, Dunfermline [1999] ScotHC 94 29 Apr 1999 HCJ Crime [ Bailii ] Â Craig Charles Duff v Procurator Fiscal, Dunfermline 29 Apr 1999 HCJ Lord Hamilton and Lord McCluskey Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Regina v Antoine Times, 10 May 1999; Gazette, 26 May 1999; Times, 04 April 2000; Gazette, 05 May 2000; [1999] EWCA Crim 1171; [1999] EWCA Crim 1170 29 Apr 1999 CACD Crime Where, on a charge of murder, a defendant asserted his unfitness to plead, it was not possible at the hearing into that suggestion and at the same time, to attempt to decide on a plea of diminished responsibility. If there were other factual disputes as to the events these needed to be investigated at a separate hearing, and the question here was equally not the same as whether there was diminished responsibility. Questions as to mens rea were not in issue. A question was certified for the House of Lords. Criminal Appeal Act 1968 - Homicide Act 1957 2(1) 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Mary Lochrie Mcwilliams v Procurator Fiscal, Falkirk 30 Apr 1999 HCJ Lord Caplan and Lord Cowie and Lord Kirkwood Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Brown v Procurator Fiscal, Glasgow [1999] ScotHC 95 30 Apr 1999 ScHC Crime [ Bailii ] Â Â Regina v Glidewell; CACD 4-May-1999 - Times, 14 May 1999; Gazette, 20 October 1999; [1999] EWCA Crim 1221; [1999] 163 JP 557 Â David James Reid v Her Majesty's Advocate 5 May 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord Coulsfield and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Joseph Byrne v Her Majesty's Advocate 5 May 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Alexander Bain Donnelly and Alison Donnelly v Her Majesty's Advocate 5 May 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Gary John Bullock v Her Majesty's Advocate [1999] ScotHC 99 5 May 1999 HCJ Lord Milligan and Lord Sutherland and Lord Justice General Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Adrian Stewart Mcpherson and William Alexander Mcpherson v Her Majesty's Advocate 5 May 1999 HCJ Lord Allanbridge and Lord Prosser Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Philip George Garden v Her Majesty's Advocate 5 May 1999 HCJ Lord Justice Clerk and Lord McCluskey and Lord Marnoch Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Regina v Ching Choi [1999] EWCA Crim 1279 7 May 1999 CACD Crime The defendant appealed his six convictions for outraging public decency. He had used a video camera and mirrors to record images of women using the toilet in a chinese supermarket. 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â Ramnath Harrilal v The State [1999] UKPC 22; Appeal No 17 of 1998 10 May 1999 PC Commonwealth, Crime PC Trinidad and Tobago [ Bailii ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ] Â In Note of Appeal By Her Majesty's Advocate v Robert Gilmour Caulfield 10 May 1999 HCJ Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Allanbridge and Lord Nimmo Smith Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Gary Mcintyre v Procurator Fiscal, Glasgow 11 May 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Milligan and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Ian Taylor Buttercase v Procurator Fiscal, Cupar [1999] ScotHC 105 11 May 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Milligan and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â John Mitchell v Procurator Fiscal, Glasgow 11 May 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Milligan and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Murdo Ewan Macleod v Procurator Fiscal, Airdrie [1999] ScotHC 108 11 May 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Milligan and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Walton v Procurator Fiscal, Falkirk [1999] ScotHC 104 11 May 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Milligan and Lord Sutherland Crime, Animals [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Kelly and Reid and Stewart and Lamont and Allison v Her Majesty's Advocate 11 May 1999 HCJ Lord Hamilton and Lord McCluskey Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Gordon Ferries v Procurator Fiscal, Aberdeen 12 May 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Milligan and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Bernard Elliot v Procurator Fiscal, Glasgow 12 May 1999 HCJ Lady Cosgrove and Lord Milligan and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Yvonne Angela Mitchell Or Harrier v Procurator Fiscal, Perth 12 May 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Milligan and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Shepherd v Procurator Fiscal, Dornoch 12 May 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Milligan and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Derek Johnston v Procurator Fiscal, Paisley 12 May 1999 HCJ Lord Milligan and Lord Sutherland and Lady Cosgrove Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Alexander Cochrane v Her Majesty's Advocate 13 May 1999 HCJ Lord Allanbridge and Lord Justice General and Lord Nimmo Smith Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Moffat v Procurator Fiscal, Edinburgh [1999] ScotHC 117 13 May 1999 ScHC Lord Cowie and Lord Milligan and Lord Kirkwood Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Thomas Ashton and James Carter v Her Majesty's Advocate 13 May 1999 HCJ Lord Allanbridge and Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Nimmo Smith Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Lumsden Or Dempsey v Procurator Fiscal, Hamilton 13 May 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Kirkwood and Lord Milligan Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Â Regina v Jackson (TS); CACD 13-May-1999 - Times, 13 May 1999; Gazette, 19 May 1999 Â John Horn v Procurator Fiscal, Kirkcaldy 13 May 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Kirkwood and Lord Milligan Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Regina v Darrell Hubble [1999] EWHC Admin 434 14 May 1999 Admn Armed Forces, Crime Indecent acts - inconsistent verdicts. [ Bailii ] Â Evan Mason v Procurator Fiscal, Dunfermline 14 May 1999 HCJ Lord Kirkwood and Lord Milligan and Lord Cowie Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Scott Hendrie v Procurator Fiscal, Linlithgow [1999] ScotHC 121 14 May 1999 HCJ Lord Kirkwood and Lord Milligan and Lord Cowie Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Johnstone v Her Majesty's Advocate [1999] ScotHC 119 14 May 1999 HCJ Lord Justice Clerk and Lord McCluskey and Lord Marnoch Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Hayden, R v [1999] EWCA Crim 1408 17 May 1999 CACD Crime [ Bailii ] Â Peter John Cairns v Her Majesty's Advocate [1999] ScotHC 122 18 May 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Justice General and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Rekvenyi v Hungary [1999] ECHR 31; 25390/94 20 May 1999 ECHR Human Rights, Crime Hudoc Grand Chamber - No violation of Art. 10; No violation of Art. 11; No violation of Art. 14+10; No violation of Art. 14+11 Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1999-III The level of precision required of domestic legislation depends to a considerable degree on the content of the instrument in question, the field it is designed to cover and the number and status of those to whom it is addressed: "whilst certainty is highly desirable, it may bring in its train excessive rigidity and the law must be able to keep pace with changing circumstances. Accordingly, many laws are inevitably couched in terms which, to a greater or lesser extent, are vague and whose interpretation and application are questions of practice." Lawfulness "implies qualitative requirements in the domestic law such as foreseeability and, generally, an absence of arbitrariness". European Convention on Human Rights 1 Citers [ Worldlii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Gary John Hunter and Roderick Mclean Snr v Her Majesty's Advocate [1999] ScotHC 123 20 May 1999 HCJ Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Kirkwood and Lord Hamilton Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Rachel Logan v Procurator Fiscal, Kilmarnock 21 May 1999 HCJ Lord Caplan and Lord Cowie and Lord Kirkwood Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â James Mcgregor v Procuator Fiscal, Glasgow, 25 May 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord McCluskey and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Leslie Lyndon Cartmill v Procurator Fiscal, Dundee 25 May 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord McCluskey and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Regina v Heath Times, 15 October 1999; [1999] EWCA Crim 1526 25 May 1999 CACD Crime Duress arising from actions such as might invite that duress, was to be held to be voluntary duress, and so not to be available as a defence in criminal proceedings. The defendant had fallen into debt to a drug dealer who had sold on that debt to a third party who threatened the defendant unless he engaged in the offence. He was held to have put himself in that position voluntarily. 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Kenneth Thomas William Michie v Procurator Fiscal, Perth [1999] ScotHC 127 25 May 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord McCluskey and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Martin Hardie Lindsay v Procurator Fiscal, Paisley [1999] ScotHC 129 25 May 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord McCluskey and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Her Majesty's Advocate v Scott Mcnally 25 May 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Justice General and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Regina v Phillip Ashley King [2000] Crim LR 835; [1999] EWCA Crim 1529 25 May 1999 CACD Crime 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Brown v Procurator Fiscal, Stranraer [1999] ScotHC 130 26 May 1999 HCJ Lord McCluskey and Lord Cowie and Lord Sutherland Crime [ Bailii ] Â Shaun Van Lierop Aka Batchelor v Procurator Fiscal, Perth 26 May 1999 HCJ Lord Caplan and Lord Cowie and Lord Kirkwood Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Ashoke Papan v The State (Reason for decision upon a petition for special leave as a poor person) [1999] UKPC 23; (Reason for decision upon a petition for special leave as a poor person) 26 May 1999 PC Steyn, Hoffmann, Hope of Craighead LL Commonwealth, Crime PC (Trinidad and Tobago) PC Trinidad and Tobago [ Bailii ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ] Â Kevin Gillespie v Procurator Fiscal, Hamilton 27 May 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord McCluskey and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Â Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Augusto Pinochet Ugarte; Admn 27-May-1999 - [1999] EWHC Admin 505 Â David Methven Gonsales O'Neill v Procurator Fiscal, Dunfermline 27 May 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord McCluskey and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Gillespie v Procurator Fiscal, Hamilton [1999] ScotHC 133 27 May 1999 HCJ Crime [ Bailii ] Â Laura Connelly v Procurator Fiscal, Paisley 28 May 1999 HCJ Lord Caplan and Lord Cowie and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Paul Patrick Thomas Montague v Procurator Fiscal, Glasgow 28 May 1999 HCJ Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Christopher Armitt v Procurator Fiscal, Kirkcaldy 28 May 1999 HCJ Lord Caplan and Lord Cowie and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â James Mcgurk v Procurator Fiscal, Dumbarton 28 May 1999 HCJ Lord Caplan and Lord Cowie and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Regina v Leeds Crown Court, Ex parte Bagoutie Unreported, 31 May 1999 31 May 1999 Lord Bingham Crime Lord Bingham: "The court made plain in Ex p McDonald, as indeed is plain on the face of the statute, that when seeking an extension or a further extension of the custody time limit the Crown must show that there is good and sufficient [reason] for making the extension and that it has acted with all due expedition. What, however, was not made plain in Ex p McDonald (because the question did not arise) is that these two provisions are in my judgment linked. . . . It is in the ordinary way the business of the prosecution to be ready. If therefore the Crown is seeking an extension of the time limit it must show that the need for the extension does not arise from lack of due expedition or due diligence on its part. It seems clear to me, however, that the requirement of due expedition or due diligence or both is not a disciplinary provision. It is not there to punish prosecutors for administrative lapses; it is there to protect defendants by ensuring that they are kept in prison awaiting trial no longer than is justifiable. That is why due expedition is called for. The court is not in my view obliged to refuse the extension of a custody time limit because the prosecution is shown to have been guilty of avoidable delay where that delay has had no effect whatever on the ability of the prosecution and the defence to be ready for trial on a predetermined trial date." Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 22(3)(b) 1 Cites 1 Citers Â Robert Ross Sanderson v Her Majesty's Advocate 1 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Justice General and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â David Wark Arnott v Her Majesty's Advocate 2 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Justice General and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Kevin Charles Duggan v Her Majesty's Advocate [1999] ScotHC 140 2 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Justice General and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Mark James Newman v Her Majesty's Advocate 2 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Justice General and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Daniel James Biggins v Procurator Fiscal, Dunfermline [1999] ScotHC 143 4 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Kirkwood and Lord Milligan Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â David John Milne v Her Majesty's Advocate 4 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Justice General and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Gary Keith Henry Morrison v Her Majesty's Advocate 4 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Justice General and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Arron Souter Aka Smart v Procurator Fiscal, Perth 4 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Kirkwood and Lord Milligan Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Scott Alexander Mcgregor v Procurator Fiscal, Paisley 8 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Prosser and Lord Osborne Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â the Lord Advocate v Scottish Media Newspapers Etc 8 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Sutherland and Lord Justice General Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Stewart John Neilson v Procurator Fiscal, Hamilton 8 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Prosser and Lord Osborne Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â John Ryan v Procurator Fiscal, Stirling 8 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Osborne and Lord Prosser Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â George Connolly Lynn v Procurator Fiscal, Edinburgh 8 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Prosser and Lord Osborne Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â David Houston v Procurator Fiscal, Greenock [1999] ScotHC 147 8 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Prosser and Lord Osborne Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Steven Kevin Ward v Her Majesty's Advocate 10 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Sutherland and Lord Osborne Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Barrett v Procurator Fiscal, Dumbarton 10 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Osborne and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Gary John Clark v Procurator Fiscal, Falkirk 10 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Osborne and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Johnny Glancy v Procurator Fiscal, Edinburgh 10 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Osborne and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Ian Blair Ballantyne and Joseph Docherty v Procurator Fiscal, Paisley 10 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Osborne and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Torbay Council v Singh Times, 05 July 1999; [1999] EWHC Admin 553; [1999] EWHC Admin 535; [1999] 2 Cr App R 451 10 Jun 1999 Admn Auld LJ Intellectual Property, Crime The court was asked if the section 92(5) defence applied where the defendant does not know of the existence of the registered trade mark in question. Held: The defence is not available in such a case. The court noted that section 92(5) speaks of a reasonable belief that the 'manner' of use of the sign did not infringe 'the registered trade mark'. This presupposed an awareness by the defendant of the existence of the registration against which he can match his manner of use of the allegedly infringing sign. The test of whether a Trade Mark offence has been committed by a trader selling goods is whether or not the infringing goods have been offered for sale, and does not depend upon any test of whether the trader was aware of the infringement or whether he had been diligent in finding an answer. The defence related only to whether the manner of use of the mark was reasonable. Trade Marks Act 1994 92(1) 92(5) 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Procurator Fiscal, Hamilton v William Waugh [1999] ScotHC 157 11 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Kirkwood and Lord Milligan and Lord Prosser Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Ugorji, R v [1999] EWCA Crim 1604 11 Jun 1999 CACD Crime [ Bailii ] Â Regina v MJ Reilly (Solicitors) [1999] EWCA Crim 1632 14 Jun 1999 CACD Crime, Legal Professions, Costs The applicant firm had been subject to a wasted costs order for a negligent assessment of the length of a trial. Held: The estimate had proved correct. The order was set aside. Â Ian Robson v Procurator Fiscal, Airdrie 15 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Kirkwood and Lord Milligan and Lord Cowie Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â David Alexander Wightman v Procurator Fiscal, Edinburgh [1999] ScotHC 159 16 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord McCluskey and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Her Majesty's Advocate v Craig Davidson 16 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Bonomy and Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Milligan Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Donald Reid v Her Majesty's Advocate 16 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Bonomy and Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Marnoch Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â John Mcfarlane Carroll and David Samuel Santini v Her Majesty's Advocate [1999] ScotHC 162 16 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Justice General and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Her Majesty's Advocate v William Maxwell Little 17 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Kingarth Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Â Regina v Emmett; CACD 18-Jun-1999 - [1999] EWCA Crim 1710; [1999] No. 99011191/Z2 Â Cameron Shead and Mark Cunningham v Her Majesty's Advocate 18 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Justice General and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Peter John Geddes v Her Majesty's Advocate 22 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord Hamilton and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Maria Ann Kenny v Her Majesty's Advocate 23 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord Sutherland and Lord Hamilton Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Director of Public Prosecutions v Seivanayagam; Director of Public Prosecutions v Moseley; Director of Public Prosecutions v Woodling Times, 23 June 1999 23 Jun 1999 QBD Crime Where a defendant had acted in breach of a court injunction, that conduct, almost necessarily, could not be considered as potentially reasonable for the purposes of the defence available under Protection from Harassment Act 1997. Protection from Harassment Act 1997 1(3)(c) Â Hector Riley v Her Majesty's Advocate 24 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Justice General and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Paul Cullington v Her Majesty's Advocate [1999] ScotHC 172 25 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Bonomy and Lord Marnoch and Lord Justice Clerk Scotland, Crime The defendant appealed his conviction for indecent assault. He challenged the use of evidence of distress as corroboration of an allegation that violence had been threatened or used. Held: The appeal failed. There was no reason to distinguish between acts of rape and of indecent assault on the issue of the weight of such evidence: 'we see no reason whatever why the evidence in question should not corroborate the evidence of the present complainer as to her lack of consent to the appellant's conduct and the use of force by him in exactly the same way as such evidence is used in cases of rape. ' The Sherriff had not been applying the case of Stob which had since been overruled. 1 Cites [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Sutherland and Yair v Procurator Fiscal, Kilmarnock [1999] ScotHC 169 25 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Coulsfield and Lord Hamilton Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Niall Ferguson Thomson v Her Majesty's Advocate 25 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord Hamilton and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Crooks, Regina v [1999] NICA 6; [1999] NI 226 25 Jun 1999 CANI Crime [ Bailii ] Â Gibbs, R v [1999] EWCA Crim 1786 25 Jun 1999 CACD Crime [ Bailii ] Â Brian Thompson Moffatt v Her Majesty's Advocate [1999] ScotHC 173 26 Jun 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Hamilton and Lord Justice Clerk Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Mitchell v The Queen Appeal No 62 of 1998; [1999] UKPC 28 28 Jun 1999 PC Commonwealth, Crime PC Jamaica [ Bailii ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ] Â Manchester City Council v Worthington [1999] EWCA Civ 1713 29 Jun 1999 CA Crime, Housing Application for committal for breach of housing ASBO. [ Bailii ] Â Â Osman v Southwark Crown Court; Admn 1-Jul-1999 - [1999] EWHC Admin 622 Â Jeremy Gray v Director of Public Prosecutions [1999] EWHC Admin 620 1 Jul 1999 Admn Crime [ Bailii ] Â Procurator Fiscal, Aberdeen v Aberdeen City Council 2 Jul 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Osborne and Lord Prosser Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Gunther Robert Macleod v Procurator Fiscal, Dingwall [1999] ScotHC 174 2 Jul 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Prosser and Lord Osborne Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Neil Grant Dawson v Procurator Fiscal, Elgin [1999] ScotHC 175 2 Jul 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Osborne and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Â Regina v Gordon; CACD 6-Jul-1999 - [1999] EWCA Crim 1904 Â Henry Leo Friel v Procurator Fiscal, Greenock 7 Jul 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord McCluskey and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Alan James Glancy v Procurator Fiscal, Edinburgh 7 Jul 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord McCluskey and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â James Jenkinson Wilson v Procurator Fiscal, Dunoon [1999] ScotHC 180 7 Jul 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord McCluskey and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Regina v West London Youth Court, Ex Parte M and Others Times, 07 July 1999 7 Jul 1999 QBD Crime Several youths were carrying around unlit petrol bombs in a public place, but there were no members of the public about, nor any rival gang with whom there might have been a clash. They were properly convicted of affray, despite this absence of anybody to perceive a threat. Public Order Act 1986 3(1) Â Andrew Walker Penman v Her Majesty's Advocate 7 Jul 1999 HCJ Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Marnoch and Lord Bonomy Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â John Paterson v Her Majesty's Advocate 8 Jul 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Kirkwood and Lord Justice Clerk Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Gerger v Turkey [1999] ECHR 46; 24919/94 8 Jul 1999 ECHR Human Rights, Crime Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 10; Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion, lack of jurisdiction); Violation of Art. 6-1 (independent and impartial tribunal); Not necessary to examine other complaint under Art. 6-1; Non-pecuniary damage - financial award; Costs and expenses partial award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings There could be no breach of article 14 where the law concerned provided that "people who commit terrorist offences . . will be treated less favourably with regard to automatic parole than persons convicted under the ordinary law", because "the distinction is made not between different groups of people, but between different types of offence." European Convention on Human Rights 14 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â John Dundee Kerr and Graeme Bruce Squire v Her Majesty's Advocate 9 Jul 1999 HCJ Lord Bonomy and Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Marnoch Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Regina v St Albans Crown Court ex parte O'Donovan [1999] EWHC Admin 664 9 Jul 1999 Admn Crime, Road Traffic Road Traffic Act 1988 5 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â Her Majesty's Advocate v S 9 Jul 1999 HCJ Lord Caplan Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Colin Turnbull Reid v Her Majesty's Advocate 9 Jul 1999 HCJ Lord Bonomy and Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Marnoch Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Michelle Suzanna Williamson and Alexander Scott Allan v Procurator Fiscal, Kirkcaldy [1999] ScotHC 186 13 Jul 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Cowie and Lord MacLean Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Regina v Crown Court At Knightsbridge ex parte Paolo Cometa [1999] EWHC Admin 678 13 Jul 1999 Admn Crime [ Bailii ] Â John Thomson Love v Procurator Fiscal, Hamilton 13 Jul 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Coulsfield and Lord MacLean Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Victoria Hilary Littlejohn v Procurator Fiscal, Perth 14 Jul 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord McCluskey and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Regina v Attorney-General, ex Parte Rockall Times, 19 July 1999 19 Jul 1999 QBD Crime, Local Government The presumption of corruption which arose by virtue of the statute under the 1916 Act did not apply on a charge of conspiracy to corrupt under the earlier Act. The charge of conspiracy was a charge on its own under the Criminal Law Act and was not affected by the presumption, and was not accordingly there was no risk of any breach of the Convention on Human Rights. Prevention of Corruption Act 1916 2 - Prevention of Corruption Act 1906 - Criminal Law Act 1977 1(1) Â Her Majesty's Advocate v Lee John Mccann and William Somerville [1999] ScotSC 21 19 Jul 1999 ScSf Sheriff K.A. Ross Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Alexander Love v Her Majesty's Advocate 21 Jul 1999 HCJ Lord Hamilton and Lord Justice General and Lord Coulsfield Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Anthony Nevada Johnson v The State [1999] UKPC 36; Appeal No 30 of 1998 21 Jul 1999 PC Crime, Commonwealth, Crime PC Trinidad and Tobago [ Bailii ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ] Â Narine Sooklal and Francis Mansingh v The State Appeal No 40 of 1998; [1999] UKPC 37; [1999] 1 WLR 2011 21 Jul 1999 PC Commonwealth, Crime PC Trinidad and Tobago 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ] Â Anthony Nevada Johnson v The State [1999] UKPC 36; Appeal No 30 of 1998 21 Jul 1999 PC Crime, Commonwealth, Crime PC Trinidad and Tobago [ Bailii ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ] Â Lincoln Defour v The State Appeal No 32 of 1998; [1999] UKPC 34 21 Jul 1999 PC Commonwealth, Crime PC Trinidad and Tobago [ Bailii ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ] Â Her Majesty's Advocate v Michael Mcginlay 21 Jul 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord Coulsfield and Lord Macfadyen Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Paul Nigel Rogers, Gareth Blake, Steven Wynn , Iain Alexander Ross and Malachi Nicholls v Director of Public Prosecutions [1999] EWHC Admin 727 22 Jul 1999 Admn Crime [ Bailii ] Â James Callander and Son Limited v Procurator Fiscal, Falkirk 22 Jul 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Cowie and Lord Milligan Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Ryan and Devine and O'Donnell v Her Majesty's Advocate 22 Jul 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord Macfadyen and Lord Nimmo Smith Crime [ ScotC ] Â Mellors v Her Majesty's Advocate [1999] ScotHC 192 22 Jul 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord Macfadyen and Lord Hamilton Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Â Regina v Chapman; CACD 22-Jul-1999 - Times, 02 August 1999; [1999] EWCA Crim 2056; [2000] 1 Cr App R 77; [2000] 1 Cr App R (S) 377; [1999] Crim LR 852 Â Helen John v Procurator Fiscal, Dumbarton 23 Jul 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Cowie and Lord Milligan Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Andrew William Mccallum v Procurator Fiscal, Hamilton 23 Jul 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Cowie and Lord Milligan Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Steven Steele Urquhart v Her Majesty's Advocate 23 Jul 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Justice General and Lord Macfadyen Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â John (Helen) v Donnelly [1999] ScotHC HCJ - 257 23 Jul 1999 HCJ Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] Â Â Redmond-Bate v Director of Public Prosecutions; Admn 23-Jul-1999 - Times, 28 July 1999; [2000] HRLR 249; [1999] EWHC Admin 733; [1999] Crim LR 998; (1999) 7 BHRC 375; (1999) 163 JP 789; CO/188/99 Â Kenneth John Mackenzie v Her Majesty's Advocate 27 Jul 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord Cowie and Lord MacLean Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Â Nicholson, Regina v; CACD 27-Jul-1999 - [1999] EWCA Crim 2101 Â Regina v Director of Public Prosecutions ex parte Re H [1999] EWHC Admin 755 29 Jul 1999 Admn Crime [ Bailii ] Â Regina v Bates [1999] EWCA Crim 2121 29 Jul 1999 CACD Crime [ Bailii ] Â Regina v Bramhall and Daniel Douglas Kernick Dale Smith [1999] EWCA Crim 2123 29 Jul 1999 CACD Crime [ Bailii ] Â Regina v Uxbridge Magistrates and Another ex parte Adimi; R v CPS ex parte Sorani; R v SSHD and Another ex parte Kaziu Times, 12 August 1999; [1999] EWHC Admin 765; [2001] QB 667; [2000] 3 WLR 434; [1999] Imm AR 560; [1999] 4 All ER 520 29 Jul 1999 Admn Simon Brown LJ, Newman J Human Rights, Immigration, Crime The three asylum seeker appellants arrived in the United Kingdom at different times in possession of false passports. They were prosecuted for possession or use of false documents contrary to section 5, and for obtaining air services by deception under the Criminal Attempts Act. At the time, their applications to be accorded refugee status had yet to be determined by the Home Secretary. They challenged the decisions to prosecute. Held: The provision in the Convention which protected an asylum seeker from criminal prosecution for unlawful entry into a country in order to apply for asylum, protected such applicants also from prosecution for the use of false papers produced in order to achieve such an entry. Such proceedings should await at least determination of the application for asylum. Simon Brown LJ said: "What, then, was the broad purpose sought to be achieved by Article 31? Self-evidently it was to provide immunity for genuine refugees whose quest for asylum reasonably involved them in breaching the law. In the course of argument Newman J suggested the following formulation: where the illegal entry or use of false documents or delay can be attributed to a bona fide desire to seek asylum whether here or elsewhere, that conduct should be covered by Article 31. That seems to me helpful. That Article 31 extends not merely to those ultimately accorded refugee status but also to those claiming asylum in good faith (presumptive refugees) is not in doubt. Nor is it disputed that article 31's protection can apply equally to those using false documents as to those (characteristically the refugees of earlier times) who enter a country clandestinely." Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees 1951 (1951) (Cmd 917) - Forgery and Counterfeiting Act 1981 5 - Criminal Attempts Act 1981 1(1) 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Regina v Hargreaves [1999] EWCA Crim 2150; 98/2069/X2 30 Jul 1999 CACD Otton LJ Crime A cyclist stopped by the police had a knife in an inside pocket. He claimed to have taken it from home and then forgotten about it. He was advised that for the purposes of the section neither forgetfulness nor the fact that he was transporting the knife from one private property to another could amount to a good reason. Held: The only possible defence which could have been advanced was based on forgetfulness. The law appeared clear. Gregson fitted the circumstances of this particular case and the appellant did not have a defence of 'good reason'. The advice was correct. Criminal Justice Act 1988 139(1) 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Director of Public Prosecutions v Mark Swann [1999] EWHC Admin 768 30 Jul 1999 Admn Police, Crime Police Act 1996 89(2) [ Bailii ] Â Corway v Independent Newspapers (Ireland) Limited [2000] 1 ILRM 426; [1999] 4 IR 485; [1999] IESC 5 30 Jul 1999 Hamilton CJ, Barrington J, Murphy J, Lynch J, Barron J Constitutional, Crime (Supreme Court of Ireland) 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â London Borough of Barking and Dagenham v David Jones [1999] EWCA Civ 2049 30 Jul 1999 CA Brooke LJ, May LJ, Laws LJ Consumer, Crime, Local Government The authority appealed refusal of an injunction restraining the defendant from further breaches of the consumer protection statutes. Trade Descriptions Act 1968 1 - Unsolicited Goods and Services Act 1971 2 - Business Names Act 1985 4 [ Bailii ] Â Keyes, Regina v [1999] EWCA Crim 2168 3 Aug 1999 CACD Roch LJ, Rougier, Wright JJ Crime The defendant appealed agaonst conviction for attempted robbery, having presented himself at three banks, demanding money and saying that he had a gun. It was not disputed that the acts done by the appellant in each case were sufficient for attempted robbery provided that he had the necessary intent. Held: The evidence that the appellant intended to rob was unsatisfactory. There was evidence that he was well under the influence of drink and that his behaviour was that of a man who suffered mental illness. He had been drinking, and the evidence was consistent with his being what he is - a lonely, isolated, elderly man seeking attention from others. Appeal allowed. [ Bailii ] Â Her Majesty's Advocate v Allan Selfridge and Angela Helen Bain [1999] ScotHC 197 4 Aug 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord Cowie and Lord MacLean Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Thorne v Procurator Fiscal, Dunfermline [1999] ScotHC 198 5 Aug 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord Coulsfield and Lord Macfadyen Scotland, Crime 1 Cites [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Belgrade Ltd v Procurator Fiscal, Kilmarnock 6 Aug 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Cowie and Lord Milligan Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Christopher Paul Douglas and Sean Alexander Mcnulty v Procurator Fiscal, Edinburgh 6 Aug 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Cowie and Lord MacLean Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â James Anthony Turnock v Her Majesty's Advocate 10 Aug 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord Cowie and Lord MacLean Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â William Morton Murray v Her Majesty's Advocate [1999] ScotHC 203 10 Aug 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord Cowie and Lord MacLean Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Gerard John Maher v Her Majesty's Advocate 11 Aug 1999 HCJ Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Sutherland and Lord Allanbridge Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Alan Michael Shields v Procurator Fiscal, Dumbarton [1999] ScotHC 204 11 Aug 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Justice General and Lord Kirkwood Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Thomas Frederick Mcarthur v Her Majesty's Advocate 11 Aug 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Justice General and Lord MacLean Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Stephen Gayne v Procurator Fiscal, Glasgow 12 Aug 1999 HCJ Lord Bonomy and Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Marnoch Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Nicholas John Paxton v Her Majesty's Advocate 13 Aug 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord Sutherland and Lord Coulsfield Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Robert Andrew v Her Majesty's Advocate 16 Aug 1999 HCJ Lord Justice Clerk and Lord McCluskey and Lord Allanbridge Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Regina v Derby Justices, Ex P Director of Public Prosecutions Times, 17 August 1999 17 Aug 1999 QBD Crime The banging of a complainant's head against a wall or part of a building by an assailant cannot constitute the use of a weapon. It was would be an abuse of language to hold that a part of a building could be a weapon. Offences against the Person Act 1861 20 Â Regina v Manchester Crown Court (Minshull Street) ex parte 'S' [1999] EWHC Admin 796 18 Aug 1999 Admn Crime [ Bailii ] Â Fulton v Her Majesty's Advocate [1999] ScotHC 212 19 Aug 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Justice General and Lord McCluskey Crime [ Bailii ] Â Â Her Majesty's Advocate v Carnall and Callaghan and McGing; HCJ 19-Aug-1999 - [1999] ScotHC 210 Â Michael John Mcgarry v Her Majesty's Advocate 19 Aug 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord Coulsfield and Lord Reed Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Regina v Mayor and Burgesses of London Borough of Lewisham ex parte Craig [1999] EWHC Admin 809 20 Aug 1999 Admn Crime Crime and Disorder Act 1998 [ Bailii ] Â Regina v Manchester Crown Court (Minshull Street) ex parte 'S' [1999] EWHC Admin 812 23 Aug 1999 Admn Crime [ Bailii ] Â Colin Bryson Campbell v Procurator Fiscal, Stirling 26 Aug 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord Coulsfield and Lord Macfadyen Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Procurator Fiscal, Falkirk v William Dick 30 Aug 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord Kirkwood and Lord Cowie Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Alexander Love v Her Majesty's Advocate 31 Aug 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Hamilton and Lord Justice General Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Nulyarimma v Thompson (1999) 120 ILR 353; [1999] FCA 1192 1 Sep 1999 Commonwealth, Crime (Federal Court of Australia) The court rejected the automatic assimiliation of the international crime of genocide into national law. Austlii CRIMINAL LAW - International crime of genocide - Meaning of genocide - Intentional element - Prohibition of genocide as a norm of international customary law - No legislation providing for prosecution of genocide claims in Australian courts - Whether genocide is cognisable in Australian courts in the absence of legislation. ABORIGINES - Claims that sponsorship of Native Title Act amendments and failure to seek World Heritage Listing of Lake Eyre region were acts of genocide - Impropriety of courts inquiring into actions of Parliament - Obligations arising under World Heritage Convention. 1 Citers [ Austlii ] Â Thomas Reid Allan v Her Majesty's Advocate 2 Sep 1999 HCJ Lord Allanbridge and Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Caroline Mcnab v Her Majesty's Advocate 2 Sep 1999 HCJ Lord Allanbridge and Lord Justice Clerk and Lord McCluskey Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Â Regina v Bow Street Magistrates ex parte Government of the United States of America; In re Allison; HL 2-Sep-1999 - Times, 02 September 1999; [1999] UKHL 31; [1999] ALL ER 1; [2000] 2 AC 216 Â Procurator Fiscal, Paisley v Scott and Manners and Smith etc [1999] ScotHC 217 7 Sep 1999 IHCS Lord Justice General and Lord Kirkwood and Lord Cowie Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â John Alexander Thomson v Procurator Fiscal, Alloa 14 Sep 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord McCluskey and Lord Penrose Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Her Majesty's Advocate v Montgomery and Coulter [1999] ScotHC 219 14 Sep 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord Johnston and Lord Eassie Crime Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 74(1) 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] - [ ScotC ] Â Procurator Fiscal, Wick v Kenneth West 15 Sep 1999 HCJ Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Allanbridge and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Stuart Douglas Walker v Her Majesty's Advocate 24 Sep 1999 HCJ Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Coulsfield and Lord McCluskey Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Ian Cauldero and Nigill Francois v The State [1999] UKPC 44; Appeal No 4 of 1999 28 Sep 1999 PC Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Mackay of Clashfern, Sir Christopher Staughton, Sir Roy Beldam, Sir Andrew Leggatt Commonwealth, Crime PC (Trinidad and Tobago) The defendants appealed their convictions for murder. They complained at to the judge's direction as to a statement and as to intent, where they had said that the gun had been wrestled from them. A statement had been taken from a witness before hisdeath, and relied upon, but the tsatement had not been taken in the presence of defence counsel (as required) so as to allow a cross examination. Held: The Court of Appeal had identified a series of weakness in the directions given to the jury, but applied the proviso to allow the verdicts to stand. The court of appeal erred in not considering the several failings in their cumulative effect of the jury, and it had been unaware of an earlier inconsistent statement by a prosecution witness. The appeal was allowed and convictions for manslaughter substituted. 1 Cites [ Bailii ] - [ PC ] Â Her Majesty's Advocate v Colin Bryson Campbell 28 Sep 1999 HCJ Lord Cameron of Lochbroom Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â James Gilday v Procurator Fiscal, Stirling 1 Oct 1999 HCJ Lord Penrose Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â William Wotherspoon v Her Majesty's Advocate [1999] ScotHC 228 5 Oct 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Her Majesty's Advocate v S 5 Oct 1999 HCJ Lord Caplan Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Kevin Barry Cannon v Her Majesty's Advocate 6 Oct 1999 HCJ Lord Allanbridge and Lord Justice General and Lord Marnoch Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Ross Samuel Telfer v Her Majesty's Advocate 6 Oct 1999 HCJ Lord Allanbridge and Lord Justice General and Lord Marnoch Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Hma v Mclean [1999] ScotHC HCJ - 258 6 Oct 1999 HCJ Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] Â Michael Patterson v Her Majesty's Advocate 6 Oct 1999 HCJ Lord Allanbridge and Lord Justice General and Lord Marnoch Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Hemmings and Others, R v [1999] EWCA Crim 2253 6 Oct 1999 CACD Crime [ Bailii ] Â Regina v Heath [2000] Crim LR 109 7 Oct 1999 CACD Kennedy LJ, Turner and Smedley JJ Crime The appellant claimed that he had become indebted to a drug supplier, and that he had been compelled by threats of physical violence to collect the consignment of drugs which gave rise to his conviction. His defence of duress failed at trial. Held: The appeal failed. Kennedy LJ: "The appellant in evidence conceded that he had put himself in the position where he was likely to be subjected to threats. He was therefore, in our judgment, not entitled to rely on those same threats as duress to excuse him from liability for subsequent criminal conduct." The court found it possible to distinguish R v Baker and Ward, observing: "It is the awareness of the risk of compulsion which matters. Prior awareness of what criminal activity those exercising compulsion may offer as a possible alternative to violence is irrelevant." 1 Cites 1 Citers Â Enrico Usai v Procurator Fiscal, Cupar [1999] ScotHC 232 8 Oct 1999 HCJ Lord Cowie and Lord Penrose and Lord McCluskey Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Linehan v Director of Public Prosecutions [1999] EWHC 4005 (Admin) 8 Oct 1999 Admn Laws LJ, Potts J Crime, Police Appeal by way of Case Stated against a decision convicting the Applicant of two charges of assaulting a constable in the execution of his duty, contrary to section 89(1) of the Police Act 1996. He had refused entry to officers acting under a section 18 authority, the appellant's sone being in custody. Held: The facts recorded as having been found in the Case Stated do not include any proposition to the effect that the officers explained that they proposed to search the premises for the proceeds of a burglary for which the Applicant's son had been arrested. The appeal was allowed. Police Act 1996 89(1) - Police & Criminal Evidence Act 1984 18 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â Dimsey and Another, R v [1999] EWCA Crim 2261 11 Oct 1999 CACD Crime [ Bailii ] Â Carol Wilson v Procurator Fiscal, Glasgow 13 Oct 1999 HCJ Lord Allanbridge and Lord Kirkwood and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Â Regina v Allen (Brian Roger); CACD 13-Oct-1999 - Times, 13 October 1999 Â Terry Symmers v Procurator Fiscal, Edinburgh [1999] ScotHC 235 13 Oct 1999 HCJ Lord Allanbridge and Lord Kirkwood and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â James Keegan v Procurator Fiscal, Glasgow [1999] ScotHC 234 13 Oct 1999 HCJ Lord Allanbridge and Lord Kirkwood and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Regina v A (Child Abduction) Gazette, 20 October 1999; Times, 15 October 1999; [2000] 1 Cr App R 418 15 Oct 1999 CACD Crime To be convicted of the offence of child abduction, it need only be shown that the defendant was the effective cause of the abduction, not that he was the sole cause of the abduction. Here the appellant had been convicted after going to London with a fifteen year old girl, who wanted to leave home. The defendant had been warned by her parents not to do so, and the girl's consent could not affect the issue. Child Abduction Act 1984 2 1 Citers Â Joseph Byrne v Her Majesty's Advocate 18 Oct 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Dawson and Lord Justice General and Lord Johnston and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Stuart Adamson v Her Majesty's Advocate 20 Oct 1999 HCJ Lord Sutherland and Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Allanbridge Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â David Thomas Cairns v Her Majesty's Advocate [1999] ScotHC 238 21 Oct 1999 HCJ Lord Marnoch and Lord Justice General and Lord Allanbridge Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Regina v Jones Unreported, 22 October 1999 22 Oct 1999 CACD Roch LJ Crime Roch LJ said: "Trial judges are inevitably aware that the giving of a provocation direction must tend to undermine lines of defence such as those which were advanced on behalf of the appellant in this case. It is unlikely that a person who has lost control of himself is acting in defence of another. It is more likely that such a person will have intended to kill or to cause really serious physical harm. For that reason a judge should not give a direction on provocation where evidence of provoking conduct by the deceased, or evidence that such conduct caused a loss of self-control by a defendant, is minimal or fanciful. To repeat the words of Lord Steyn, there has to be evidence of 'specific provoking conduct resulting in a loss of control'." Homicide Act 1957 3 1 Citers Â Anthony Briggs v Cipriani Baptiste (Commissioner of Prisions) and Others Times, 03 November 1999; [1999] UKPC 47; (Appeal No 31 of 1999) 28 Oct 1999 PC Human Rights, Commonwealth, Crime (Trinidad and Tobago) Where there were no remaining disputed facts which could give rise to an objection, it was not a breach of the human rights of an individual not to be executed except by due and lawful process. The system of petition within the Inter-American Convention was clear. [ Bailii ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ] Â Rai, R v [1999] EWCA Crim 2250 29 Oct 1999 CACD Crime [ Bailii ] Â Regina v Leeson Times, 02 November 1999 2 Nov 1999 CACD Crime On a charge of possession of a class A controlled drug with intent to supply, it was necessary for the prosecution to show the possession of a controlled drug, but not necessarily to prove which drug within the class was possessed. The prosecution must show an intention to supply the substance found even if the possessor was mistaken as to its precise nature. Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 5 (3) Â Â Crown Prosecution Service v Barnard and Others; QBD 3-Nov-1999 - Times, 09 November 1999; Gazette, 03 November 1999 Â Patel, Regina v [1999] EWCA Crim 2268; [2000] 2 Cr App R (S) 10 3 Nov 1999 CACD Crime The defendant postmaster had pleaded guilty to one count of conspiring to obtain property by deception. He had obtained payment of £51,920 from the Post Office by using stolen benefit books and forging signatures. He had then paid a share of the proceeds to an accomplice. A confiscation order was made against him in the full sum of £51,920. He argued that the judge had had a discretion to order payment of a smaller sum, and that he should not in any event have ordered the payment of more than what was left to the defendant after paying his accomplice. Held: The submissions were rejected. The discretion which the court had originally enjoyed under the Act had been removed by the 1995 Act. The defendant admitted receiving in his hand the sum ordered, and what he did with the money afterwards was irrelevant. 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Gordon Mclean v Her Majesty's Advocate 3 Nov 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord Allanbridge and Lord Marnoch Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Gordon Mclean v Her Majesty's Advocate 3 Nov 1999 HCJ Lord Allanbridge and Lord Marnoch and Lord Justice General Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Mb, R v [1999] EWCA Crim 2274 4 Nov 1999 CACD Crime [ Bailii ] Â Andrew Thompson v Procurator Fiscal, Hamilton 5 Nov 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Sutherland and Lord Caplan and Lord Hamilton Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Anthony Duffy v Her Majesty's Advocate 5 Nov 1999 HCJ Lord Coulsfield and Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Marnoch Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Regina v Rai Gazette, 17 November 1999; Times, 10 November 1999 10 Nov 1999 CACD Crime The deception required as an element of the offence of obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception, could be constituted by acquiescence, where there could properly be said to be a continuing representation, under which the person deceived had acted. The defendant had obtained a grant for his mother's house whilst she was alive to assist her living there, but the grant would start only after she died. He had said nothing to suggest the grant might no longer be appropriate. Theft Act 1968 Â Â Regina v Bowden; CACD 10-Nov-1999 - Gazette, 08 December 1999; Times, 19 November 1999; (2001) QB 88; [1999] EWCA Crim 2270 Â Robert Jackson Rodger v Her Majesty's Advocate 16 Nov 1999 HCJ Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Kirkwood and Lord McCluskey Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â David Gormley and Elizabeth Cowe Crawford Or Gormley v Her Majesty's Advocate 17 Nov 1999 HCJ Lord Justice Clerk and Lord McCluskey and Lord Kirkwood Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Paton v Procurator Fiscal, Alloa; Paton v Ritchie [1999] ScotHC 246; 2000 SCCR 151; 2000 JC 271; 2000 SLT 239; 1999 GWD 39-1886 24 Nov 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord Dawson and Lord Sutherland Crime 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Director of Public Prosecutions v Armstrong Gazette, 25 November 1999 25 Nov 1999 QBD Crime The defendant was charged with inciting another to distribute indecent photographs of children, contrary to common law. The person approached never had it in mind to agree, but it was held that the offence was committed by the act of incitement. There was no need to show any parity of mens rea on the part of the person incited. Â Â Hashman and Harrup v The United Kingdom; ECHR 25-Nov-1999 - (1999) 30 EHRR 241; 25594/94; [1999] ECHR 133; [2000] Crim LR 185; 8 BHRC 104 Â Lewin (Trading Standards Officer) v Barratt Homes Ltd Gazette, 01 December 1999 1 Dec 1999 QBD Crime, Land New houses were advertised for sale. Pictures of the house were available, with some disclaimers as to minor variations, but the houses actually built had greater deviation. The builder claimed the statements were not descriptions of existing properties, but they knew they could not build the houses as described. Held: The case was remitted to the magistrates with a direction to convict. Property Misdescriptions Act 1991 Â Angela Ramdeen v The State Appeal No 75 of 1998; [1999] UKPC 50 1 Dec 1999 PC Commonwealth, Crime PC Trinidad and Tobago [ Bailii ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ] Â Regina v Marjoram Times, 03 December 1999 3 Dec 1999 CACD Crime Where injuries occurred as part of an attempt by the complainant to escape the acts of the defendant, the correct direction from the judge was that the injury must have been reasonably foreseeable as a consequence by a reasonable person in the defendant's shoes Â Her Majesty's Advocate v Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi and Al Amin Khalifa Fhimah [1999] ScotHC 248 8 Dec 1999 HCJ Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime The court considered whether the criminal complaint that the defendants had been part of a conspiracy to set a bomb aboard an airliner which exploded over Scotland, was justiciable in Scotland. Lord Sutherland: "Where however, a crime of the utmost gravity has been in fact committed in a particular country and it can be shown that that crime is the culmination of a long drawn out and complex conspiracy, it appears to me quite illogical to say that that country has no interest in putting the conspirators on trial for their part in what has happened, even though their activities were all carried out abroad. Defence counsel recognise that this is undoubtedly so in relation to the charge of murder in Scotland. I see no logical reason why the same principle should not apply to the charge of conspiring to commit the final criminal act, which is alleged to be the culmination and the whole purpose of the conspiracy." 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â Report To the Inner House of the Court of Session By Clancy v Caird [1999] ScotHC 256 10 Dec 1999 HCJ Scotland, Crime [ Bailii ] Â Alan John Howitt and Anthony Duffy v Her Majesty's Advocate 10 Dec 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord McCluskey and Lord Prosser and Lord Penrose and Lord Nimmo Smith Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â Â Director of Public Prosecutions v Armstrong; CACD 10-Dec-1999 - Times, 10 December 1999 Â Â Regina v Whitehouse; CACD 10-Dec-1999 - Times, 10 December 1999; Gazette, 07 January 2000 Â Robert Carruthers v Her Majesty's Advocate 14 Dec 1999 HCJ Lord Justice General and Lord Prosser and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â William Mcdermott v Her Majesty's Advocate 17 Dec 1999 HCJ Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Allanbridge and Lady Cosgrove Scotland, Crime [ ScotC ] Â In the Petition of Porter and Smith [1999] ScotHC 255 24 Dec 1999 HCJ Crime [ Bailii ] Â Michael Mckenna v Her Majesty's Advocate [1999] ScotHC 253 30 Dec 1999 ScHC Lord Justice General and Lord Penrose and Lord Sutherland Scotland, Crime, Human Rights The appellant was charged with murder. A witness had since died, and he objected to the introduction of his written statement, on the basis that this would infringe his right to a fair trial. The evidence was likely to be decisive. Held: The fairness of the trial had to be considered as a whole. There was no basis in authority that admission of the evidence would necessarily prejudice the right to a fair trial. Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 259(5) - European Convention on Human Rights 6.1 6.3 1 Cites [ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ] Â
		Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.

swarb.co.uk - law index

Crime - From: 1999 To: 1999