M, Regina v; Regina v Z; Regina v I; Regina v R; Regina v B (No 2): CACD 27 Apr 2007

The defendants, accused of offences under the 2000 Act, appealed an interim finding that documents stored on computers could amount to ‘articles’ within the Act. They said that the existence of sections 57 and 58 suggested two distinct regimes, one for documents, and one for articles.
Held: The district judge should have followed Rowe. The appeal was dismissed. The defendants were not prejudiced, and any possible injustice could be dealt with later.
Goldring J, Swift J
[2007] EWCA Crim 970, Times 17-May-2007
Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996, Terrorism Act 2000 57
England and Wales
CitedRegina v Montilla, Newbury etc CACD 3-Nov-2003
The Crown appealed a decision that a conviction under subsection 2 required proof that the money the disposal of which the defendant was accused to have assisted was in fact the proceeds of drug trafficking.
Held: Subsections 1 and 2 were . .
PreferredRowe v Regina CACD 15-Mar-2007
The defendant had been convicted of possessing articles for terrorist purposes, namely a notebook with notes setting out how to construct a mortar bomb in his handwriting. There was also a coded list of potential targets.
Held: The decision in . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 03 February 2021; Ref: scu.251533