Regina v Barker: CCA 1941

In the course of investigating the defendant for tax faud, he was interviewed by the Inland Revenue. Relying upon a standard statement by the revenue, the appellant produced two ledgers which had been fraudulently prepared in order to induce the Revenue to believe that the irregularities amounted to only andpound;7,000.
Held: The statement by the Revenue, which reflected a statement in Parliament, was partly a promise or an inducement and that it was not admissible on a charge of conspiring to cheat the Revenue by producing false statements of account. It was held, that ‘those documents stand on precisely the same footing as an oral or written confession which is brought into existence as the result of such a promise, inducement or threat.’
References: [1941] 2 KB 381, [1941] 3 All ER 33
Judges: Tucker J
This case is cited by:

  • Not followed – Regina v Allen HL 11-Oct-2001
    The defendant appealed against a finding that he had concealed an emolument, namely accommodation. He said that, as a shadow director of the company within the extended meaning of that phrase under the Act, the deeming provisions under Income Tax . .
    (, , [2001] UKHL 45, [2002] 1 AC 509, [2002] HRLR 4, [2001] 4 All ER 768, [2001] STC 1537, 4 ITL Rep 140, [2002] 1 Cr App Rep 18, [2001] BTC 421, [2001] STI 134, , [2001] UKHL TC – 74 – 263)
  • Cited – Regina v Sewa Singh Gill and Paramjit Singh Gill CACD 31-Jul-2003
    The appellants sought to challenge their convictions for cheating the Inland Revenue. They were accused of having hidden assets and income from the revenue. The appellants objected to the use at trial of material obtained in a ‘Hansard’ interview. . .
    (, [2003] EWCA Crim 2256, Times 29-Aug-03, Gazette 02-Oct-03)

These lists may be incomplete.
Last Update: 27 November 2020; Ref: scu.183106