Tag: Crime

L, Regina v: CACD 22 Jan 2015

The prosecutor appealed against the discharg eof the defendant for having a prohibited weapon, a modified Crossman 2250B carbon dioxide powered .22 calibre gun. It was not in dispute that it was a weapon, barrelled, that .22 air pellets could be discharged, and that it had sufficient power to be lethal. He said that as an air weapon it was incapable of being a prohibited firearm.
Held: The prosecutor’s appeal succeeded.

Rafferty LJ, Foskett J,Carey HHJ
[2015] EWCA Crim 5
Bailii
Firearms Act 1968
England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572388

Tesco Stores Ltd v Brent London Borough Council: QBD 16 Feb 1993

An employee’s actual knowledge of and information about the age of a video purchaser could properly be imputed to his employer company.

Gazette 07-Apr-1993, Times 16-Feb-1993, [1993] 1 WLR 1037
Video Recordings Act 1984 11(1) 11(2)(b)
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Interfact Ltd and Another v Liverpool City Council Admn 23-May-2005
The defendants, operators of licensed sex shops, appealed convictions for offences under the Act. The shops had supplied videos rated R*18 by mail order from the shops. The Trading Standards Officer said this did not satisfy the requirement that . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: scu.89773

Qosja, Regina v: CACD 22 Sep 2016

The defendant appealed against his conviction for stalking under the 1977 Act, saying that the complainant had been put in fear on only one occasion.
Held: The appeal failed: ‘a plain and natural reading of the wording of section 4A (1)(b) (i) of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 reveals that the section is wide enough to look to incidents of violence in the future and not only to incidents giving rise to a fear of violence arising directly out of the incident in question. Nor is there any requirement for the fear to be of violence on a particular date or time in the future, or at a particular place or in a particular manner, or for there to be a specific threat of violence. There can be a fear of violence sufficient for the statute where that fear of violence is of violence on a separate and later occasion. The position can be tested simply by reference to the example of somebody saying ‘I’ll come back and get you’.’

David LJ, Carr DBE, Patterson DBE JJ
[2016] EWCA Crim 1543
Bailii
Protection from Harassment Act 1977 4A(1)(b)(i)
England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 24 January 2022; Ref: scu.570555

France v Regina: CACD 27 Oct 2016

The appellant had been convicted of encouraging a police officer to commit the offence of misconduct in public office by paying him for stories for the Sun newspaper.
Held: The appeal succeeded: ‘more detailed instruction as to the factors relevant to the question of the public interest were required on the facts of this case so that the jury could weigh carefully the seriousness of the breach. As part and parcel of that direction, the jury should have been directed to consider whether the information passed was so trivial or inconsequential that the public interest could not, in the particular circumstances of the case, be harmed. The reference to ‘confidential information’ in . . the written directions for the jury . . was potentially misleading: it should either have been removed or further explained. The written directions also placed the issue of ‘reasonable excuse or justification’ as part of the second element from Chapman, as if consideration of that factor was not relevant to the last element.’

Hallett VP LJ, King, Dove JJ
[2016] EWCA Crim 1588
Bailii
England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 24 January 2022; Ref: scu.570556

Huddart, Regina v: CACD 24 Nov 1998

Appeal against conviction for not having a dog under proper control, it having bitten a third party.
Held: The appeal failed: ‘ the jury were given sufficient guidance as to the approach which they should adopt to the evidence of identification. It was then a matter for them to decide whether they were sure that the dog which bit Mr Falcon was Winston. In our judgment there is no merit in this ground of appeal.’

Pill LJ, Turner J
[1998] EWCA Crim 3342, [1999] EHLR 281, [1999] Crim LR 568
Bailii
England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 24 January 2022; Ref: scu.570335

Riley and Others v Crown Prosecution Service: Admn 18 Oct 2016

The defendants appealed by case stated from convictions under the 2006 Act arising from the treatment of cows including at a slaughterhouse. Arguments were put that the prosecution was time barred.
Held: The court recognsed the limited role of the investigators and the CPS who would eventually institute proceedings. Time started running under s.31(1)(b) of the Act once a suitably qualified CPS employee has knowledge of ‘…evidence which the prosecutor thinks is sufficient to justify the proceedings’, and the case was not time barred.

Gross LJ, Andrews J
[2016] EWHC 2531 (Admin), [2016] WLR(D) 530
Bailii, WLRD
Animal Welfare Act 2006 4(1), Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 127(1)
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Morgans v Director of Public Prosecutions QBD 29-Dec-1998
The defendant argued that once the prosecutor had all the material on which the prosecution was eventually brought, then for the purposes of section 11(2) time began to run.
Held: When considering the time limits for a prosecution under the . .
Distinguished – Donnachie, Regina (on the Application of) v Cardiff Magistrates’ Court and Another Admn 16-Mar-2009
A prosecutor for the purposes of the Trade Descriptions Act was the council and not an individual employee. . .
Cited – RSPCA v Johnson Admn 16-Oct-2009
Appeal by the RSPCA by way of case stated from a decision refusing to hear an information laid by the Society on the basis that it was out of time. The defendant was a horse owner accused of causing suffering in his horse.
Held: Pill LJ said: . .
Cited – Letherbarrow v Warwickshire County Council Admn 15-Dec-2014
This is an appeal by way of case stated from a decision of the Warwickshire Justices to convict the appellant on a number of counts of contraventions of the Animal Welfare Act 2006. It is argued that the prosecution had failed to comply with the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Animals

Updated: 24 January 2022; Ref: scu.570265

Paoletti And Others: ECJ 6 Oct 2016

ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 6 TEU – Article 49 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Principle of retroactivity of the more lenient criminal law – Italian nationals having organised the illegal entry into Italy of Romanian nationals – Acts carried out before the accession of Romania to the European Union – Effect of Romania’s accession on the criminal offence of facilitation of illegal immigration – Implementation of EU law – Jurisdiction of the Court

ECLI:EU:C:2016:748, [2016] EUECJ C-218/15
Bailii
Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union 49, TEU 6
European

Human Rights, Crime, Immigration

Updated: 24 January 2022; Ref: scu.570141

N Bevan Ltd v Revenue and Customs (Procedure : Other): FTTTx 7 Oct 2016

MONEY LAUNDERING – whether appellant had breached requirements of the Money Laundering Regulations 2007 regarding the carrying out of customer due diligence monitoring business relationships keeping adequate records and maintaining appropriate risk sensitive policies and procedures – yes-whether penalty of andpound;3750 imposed appropriate-penalty reduced to andpound;3094

[2016] UKFTT 674 (TC)
Bailii
Money Laundering Regulations 2007
England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 24 January 2022; Ref: scu.570103

Talbot v Oxford City Justices; Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 3 Feb 2000

The defendant having been found inside an office was convicted under the Act of being in an enclosed area within the Act. It was held that the Act clearly referred to enclosed but open areas. The list of buildings was exhaustive and did not include an office or room.

Gazette 03-Feb-2000, Times 15-Feb-2000, [2000] 1 WLR 1102
Vagrancy Act 1824 4
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Akhurst v Director of Public Prosecutions QBD 12-Mar-2009
The defendants appealed their convictions under the 1824 Act for being found in an enclosed space for an unlawful purpose. They had been filmed on CCTV on sites owned by Middlesex University.
Held: The appeals succeeded. The magistrates had . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 21 January 2022; Ref: scu.89697

Regina v S (Trade Mark Defence) (Roger Sliney v London Borough of Havering): CACD 20 Nov 2002

The defendant alleged that the offence of which had been convicted, under the 1994 Act, infringed his rights under article 6.2 in reversing the burden of proof.
Held: The principle that the duty of proof lay on the prosecution was subject to statutory exceptions. To place a legal (persuasive) burden of proof on the defendant is possible under statute, but is exceptional, and requires clear words. Here, parliament had used the word ‘prove’ rather than ‘show’ in describing the burden on the defendant to establish a defence. The defence did not allege dishonesty. Having regard not only to the interests of the accused and the public, the imposition of legal burden on the accused, in the section is necessary, justified and proportionate. There is a heavy burden on those justifying a reverse legal burden of proof, but that burden was discharged here.

Rose LJ, Hughes, Davis JJ
Times 02-Dec-2002, Gazette 06-Feb-2003, [2002] EWCA Crim 2558, [2003] UKHRR 328, [2003] 1 Cr App R 35
Bailii
Trade Marks Act 1994 92(5) 94, European Convention on Human Rights 6.2
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v S (Trade Mark Defence) (Roger Sliney v London Borough of Havering) CACD 20-Nov-2002
The defendant alleged that the offence of which had been convicted, under the 1994 Act, infringed his rights under article 6.2 in reversing the burden of proof.
Held: The principle that the duty of proof lay on the prosecution was subject to . .
Doubted – Regina v S (Trade Mark Defence) (Roger Sliney v London Borough of Havering) CACD 20-Nov-2002
The defendant alleged that the offence of which had been convicted, under the 1994 Act, infringed his rights under article 6.2 in reversing the burden of proof.
Held: The principle that the duty of proof lay on the prosecution was subject to . .

Cited by:
Cited – Barnfather v London Borough of Islington Education Authority, Secretary of State for Education and Skills QBD 7-Mar-2003
The appellant was convicted of the crime of being a parent whose child had failed to attend school regularly. She challenged saying that the offence required no guilty act on her part, but was one of strict liability, and contrary to her human . .
Cited – Regina v S (Trade Mark Defence) (Roger Sliney v London Borough of Havering) CACD 20-Nov-2002
The defendant alleged that the offence of which had been convicted, under the 1994 Act, infringed his rights under article 6.2 in reversing the burden of proof.
Held: The principle that the duty of proof lay on the prosecution was subject to . .
Doubted – Regina v S (Trade Mark Defence) (Roger Sliney v London Borough of Havering) CACD 20-Nov-2002
The defendant alleged that the offence of which had been convicted, under the 1994 Act, infringed his rights under article 6.2 in reversing the burden of proof.
Held: The principle that the duty of proof lay on the prosecution was subject to . .
Cited – Regina v Johnstone HL 22-May-2003
The defendant was convicted under the 1994 Act of producing counterfeit CDs. He argued that the affixing of the name of the artist to the CD was not a trade mark use, and that the prosecution had first to establish a civil offence before his act . .
Cited – Essex Trading Standards v Singh Admn 3-Mar-2009
The defendant had been accused of selling counterfeit trainer shoes. The prosecutor appealed against dismissal of the prosecution on the basis that the defenant had not known that they were counterfeit.
Held: The onus of proof lay on the . .
Cited – Shepherd v The Information Commissioner CACD 18-Jan-2019
The defendant had been part of an organisation subject to an investigation of child sex abuse. He was cleared of involvement, but had disseminated the confidential reports containing sensitive personal data to support his contention that the process . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Intellectual Property, Crime, Human Rights

Updated: 20 January 2022; Ref: scu.178305

McMillan v Crown Prosecution Service: Admn 12 May 2008

Appeal by case stated by Justices for Sunderland in respect of a decision of the Magistrates’ Court in which the appellant M was convicted of an offence of being drunk and disorderly in a public place. She had been arrested in the front garden of a house, but the behaviour complained of was as she was taken across the public footpath to the police car.
Held: The appeal failed: ‘The Justices were plainly satisfied that the officer made the pragmatic decision not to arrest her from the garden, perhaps for an offence under section 5 of the Public Order Act, preferring what may be described as a negotiated conclusion, which would of course have been in the interests of the appellant. The Justices found that the officer took her by the arm ‘to escort her out of the garden to speak to her in the street’. It is plain that they rejected any suggestion that she was being moved from a private place to a public place simply so as to justify an arrest outside the garden for an offence which had a public place requirement.
In my judgment, in acting as he did, the officer who had had in mind the steepness of the steps in the garden and had wanted ‘to steady her for her own safety’ can properly be said to have acted in conformity with ‘generally acceptable standards of conduct’. I am satisfied that the Justices were entitled to reach the conclusion that they did on that issue. It follows that, the central point of the case being resolved in favour of the respondent, I would dismiss the appeal.’

Maurice Kay LJ, Penry-Davey J
[2008] EWHC 1457 (Admin), [2008] LLR 513, (2008) 172 JP 485
Bailii
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984
Citing:
Cited – Collins v Wilcock QBD 1984
The defendant appealed against her conviction for assaulting a police constable in the execution of his duty. He had sought to caution her with regard to activity as a prostitute. The 1959 Act gave no power to detain, but he took hold of her. She . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 19 January 2022; Ref: scu.566768