Mote v Regina: CACD 21 Dec 2007

The defendant appealed his convictions for offences relating to the claiming of benefits, saying that he was immune from prosecution as a member of the European Parliament, and that the verdicts were inconsistent with acquittals on other charges.
Held: There had been no abuse of process in prosecuting the defendant whilst he was a member of the European Parliament. The prosecution did not attack any of his privileges. The inconsistencies such as they were could be explained by factual differences between the counts and evidence supporting them. On one count, the appeal was allowed.
Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers CJ, Ouseley J, Blake J
[2007] EWCA Crim 3131
Bailii
Theft Act 1968 15A 17(1)(a), Social Security Administration Act 1992 111A(1A), 1965 Protocol on Privileges and Immunities of the European Communities 8 9 10, Indictments Act 1915 5(1)
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRegina v Horseferry Road Magistrates’ Court, ex Parte Bennett (No 1) HL 24-Jun-1993
The defendant had been brought to the UK in a manner which was in breach of extradition law. He had, in effect, been kidnapped by the authorities.
Held: The High Court may look at how an accused person was brought within the jurisdiction when . .
CitedRegina, ex parte International Air Transport Association, European Low Fares Airline Association v Department for Transport ECJ 10-Jan-2006
ECJ Carriage by air – Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 – Articles 5, 6 and 7 -Compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights – Validity – . .
CitedRegina v Mullen (Nicholas Robert Neil) CACD 4-Feb-1999
British authorities, in disregard of available extradition procedures, initiated and procured the unlawful deportation of the appellant from Zimbabwe to England. The appellant was charged and tried for conspiracy to cause explosions likely to . .
See AlsoMote v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and Another CA 14-Dec-2007
The appellant was accused of having received income benefits to which he was not entitled. A prosecution was commenced and at the same time he appealed to the tribunal against the decision that there had been an overpayment. The authorities . .
CitedRegina v Johal and Ram 1972
Ashworth J said: ‘The argument for the appellants appeared to involve the proposition that an indictment, in order to be defective, must be one which in law did not charge any offence at all and therefore is bad on the face of it. We do not take . .
Not approvedCova Products Ltd, Regina v CACD 14-Jan-2005
The court considered the practice on an appeal alleging that the jury had returned inconsistent verdicts.
Held: The court approved a statement from Professor Smith: ‘a better view would be that the conviction is not safe unless the court is . .
Not ApprovedParry v Halton Magistrates’ Court and Another Admn 20-Jun-2005
. .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 08 February 2021; Ref: scu.262970