Regina v Manning: CACD 23 Jul 1998

The accused dishonestly falsified a number of insurance cover notes which were said to be documents required for an accounting purpose, namely, those of the persons who had sought cover and to whom the cover notes were forwarded. The accused ran his own maritime insurance business, obtaining instructions from a number of clients to place insurance on ships which was effected through brokers. The allegation was that, although he obtained the relevant premiums, the cover was either not placed or only partially placed so that he issued false cover notes to his clients. Those cover notes set out the assured and the insurer, the period and the interest covered and included also the rate to be paid and the dates which premiums were thereafter to be paid. There was no evidence called by the Crown to explain the actual use made of the notes by the clients, but the matter was left to the jury by the judge as a question of fact. the Court had ‘no doubt that the cover notes would play a role in the account process of [the] clients’, but the question was whether the jury was entitled to reach that conclusion on the evidence. His Lordship then, after referring to certain authorities including Sundhers over which he had presided, then contrasted the circumstances in the present case and expressed the Court’s conclusions in these terms: ‘The cover note is a very different sort of document from a claim form. As we have said it clearly sets out what the client has to pay and how he has to pay it. Although we have not found the issue an easy one, and regard it as being close to the borderline, we think on balance that it would be open in this case to a reasonable juror to conclude, simply by looking at the document that it was required for an accounting purpose, in that it sets out what the client owes.’ The last act or terminatory theory of jurisdiction was the common law of England and Wales.
Buxton LJ
Times 23-Jul-1998, [1999] QB 980
Theft Act 1968 17(1)(a)
England and Wales
Citing:
ApprovedSomchai Liangsiriprasert v Government of the United States of America PC 1991
(Hong Kong) Application was made for the defendant’s extradition from Hong Kong to the USA. The question was whether a conspiracy entered into outside Hong Kong with the intention of committing the criminal offence of trafficking in drugs in Hong . .

Cited by:
CitedRegina v Smith (Wallace Duncan) (No 3) CACD 28-Nov-2002
The appellant was supported in his appeal by the Criminal Cases Review Commission. In addition the appellant sought to permission raise other grounds of appeal. The prosecution asserted that the court could filter the grounds of appeal already . .
CitedPurdy, Regina (on the Application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 30-Jul-2009
Need for Certainty in Scope of Offence
The appellant suffered a severe chronic illness and anticipated that she might want to go to Switzerland to commit suicide. She would need her husband to accompany her, and sought an order requiring the respondent to provide clear guidelines on the . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 07 March 2021; Ref: scu.183179