The defendant appealed his conviction for possession of a bladed article in a public place. It was a pocket knife which locked open, but its blade could be retracted on using the mechanism, and did not exceed three inches.
Held: The Court looked at the parliamentary background to the section. It was clear that various amendments were considered which would prevent prosecution for possession of such a knife, but the actual words used were clear did not allow the application of Pepper v Hart, and therefore in assessing the question of what constituted a folding knife, ministerial statements in the House of Commons were not to be admitted. The case of Harris and Fehmi was binding, and the appeal failed.
Waller LJ, Owen J, Sullivan J
Gazette 26-Feb-1998, Times 17-Feb-1998, [1998] EWCA Crim 385, [1998] Crim LR 562, [1998] 2 Cr App R 121
Bailii
Criminal Justice Act 1988 139
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Harris v Director of Public Prosecutions; Fehmi v Director of Public Prosecutions QBD 9-Sep-1992
A lockable folding knife was a fixed blade knife where a process was required in order to refold it. To be ‘a folding pocket-knife’ the blade has to be readily and immediately foldable at all times simply by the folding process. It held that a knife . .
Cited – Pepper (Inspector of Taxes) v Hart HL 26-Nov-1992
Reference to Parliamentary Papers behind Statute
The inspector sought to tax the benefits in kind received by teachers at a private school in having their children educated at the school for free. Having agreed this was a taxable emolument, it was argued as to whether the taxable benefit was the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Crime, Constitutional
Leading Case
Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.86525