Regina v Clarke: CACD 2 Apr 1996

Several people had lost large sums of mony by a fraud. The defendant had approached them offering his services as a private investigator to seek to recover their money. He pleaded guilty to one allegation of deception after an indication from the judge as to his intended direction on dishonesty which would disapply the defendant’s defence under Ghosh. He sought to assert that though he made misrepresentations to obtain the work, he honestly thought he could do it.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The defendant’s case on dishonesty was unduly constrained by the judge’s ruling that in effect excluded evidence of his belief as to his ability to perform the work and the evidence the court was told could also be adduced as to his ability to do that. It also excluded the actual evidence that was eventually accepted as part of his mitigation, that he had in fact performed the work.
Rose LJ, Hidden, Buxton JJ
[1996] EWCA Crim 1804, [1996] Crim LR 824
Theft Act 1968 16
England and Wales
CitedRegina v Ghosh CACD 5-Apr-1982
The defendant surgeon was said to have made false claims for payment for operations, and was charged under the 1968 Act. He claimed to have been entitled to the sums claimed, and denied that he had been dishonest. The court considered the meaning of . .
CitedRegina v Feely CACD 1973
In relation to a charge of theft where the issue of dishonesty is raised, the issue must be left to the jury. Dishonesty is not a matter of law, but a jury question of fact and standards. Except to the limited extent that section 2 of the Theft Act . .
CitedRegina v O’Connell CACD 1992
The appellant and his wife appliied for loans to buy residential properties to be let to obtain a rental income covering most of the mortgage payments. The properties were later sold to take advantages of increases in value. A sum of andpound;1.5 . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 26 March 2021; Ref: scu.431833