Tag: Crime

K v Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie, F v Belgium – Allegations De Crimes De Guerre: ECJ 2 May 2018

Free movement for those suspected of War Crimes

Grand Chamber – Citizenship of The European Union – Right To Move and Reside Freely Within The Territory of The Member States – Restrictions – Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Citizenship of the European Union – Right to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States – Directive 2004/38/EC – Second subparagraph of Article 27(2) – Restrictions on the right of entry and the right of residence on grounds of public policy, public security or public health – Expulsion on grounds of public policy or public security – Conduct representing a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental interests of society – Person whose asylum application has been refused for reasons within the scope of Article 1F of the Geneva Convention or Article 12(2) of Directive 2011/95/EU – Article 28(1) – Article 28(3)(a) – Protection against expulsion – Residence in the host Member State for the previous ten years – Imperative grounds of public security – Meaning

K Lenaerts P
ECLI:EU:C:2018:296, [2018] EUECJ C-331/16, [2018] WLR(D) 272
Bailii, WLRD
European

Crime, Immigration

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.609513

Rex v Eliot, Hollis and Valentine: 1629

Proceedings were taken in the King’s Bench against three members of the House of Commons, who were charged with seditious speeches, contempt of the King (Charles I) in resisting the adjournment of the House and with conspiracy to keep the Speaker in the chair by force. All pleaded to the jurisdiction. The plea nihil dicit meant that conviction would be inevitable, but if they defended themselves at all, their contention that Parliament was the only body with jurisdiction over these matters would be totally undermined. Eliot’s self-acknowledged dilemma was that if he did not submit he would incur the censure of the Court, but if he did, his act would be considered ‘a prejudice to posterity’ and ‘a danger to Parliament’. So he would be silent, just because his duty was to Parliament.
Held: Members had no privilege to speak seditiously or behave in a disorderly manner.
(1629) 3 St Tr 294
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Rex v Eliot, Holles and Valentine 1629
Parliamentary privilege did not protect the maker against seditious comments made in the Chamber of the House. . .

Cited by:
Cited – Prebble v Television New Zealand Ltd PC 27-Jun-1994
(New Zealand) The plaintiff, an MP, pursued a defamation case. The defendant wished to argue for the truth of what was said, and sought to base his argument on things said in Parliament. The plaintiff responded that this would be a breach of . .
Cited – Chaytor and Others, Regina v CACD 30-Jul-2010
The defendants had been members of the Houses of Commons and of Lords. They faced charges of dishonesty in respect of their expenses claims. They now appealed a finding that they were not subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of Parliament under . .
Cited – Chaytor and Others, Regina v SC 1-Dec-2010
The defendants faced trial on charges of false accounting in connection in different ways with their expenses claims whilst serving as members of the House of Commons. They appealed against rejection of their assertion that the court had no . .
Cited – Kimathi and Others v Foreign and Commonwealth Office QBD 20-Dec-2017
Parliamentary privilege The claimants sought to have admitted as evidence extracts from Hansard in support of their claim for damages arising from historic claims.
Held: The court set out the authorities and made orders as to each element. . .
Cited – Kimathi and Others v Foreign and Commonwealth Office QBD 20-Dec-2017
Parliamentary privilege The claimants sought to have admitted as evidence extracts from Hansard in support of their claim for damages arising from historic claims.
Held: The court set out the authorities and made orders as to each element. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 20 October 2021; Ref: scu.409974

Rex v Eliot, Holles and Valentine: 1629

Parliamentary privilege did not protect the maker against seditious comments made in the Chamber of the House.
(1629) 3 St Tr 293
England and Wales
Cited by:
See Also – Rex v Eliot, Hollis and Valentine 1629
Proceedings were taken in the King’s Bench against three members of the House of Commons, who were charged with seditious speeches, contempt of the King (Charles I) in resisting the adjournment of the House and with conspiracy to keep the Speaker in . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 20 October 2021; Ref: scu.427744

Wright, Regina v: CACD 5 May 2011

Young Cannabis plants found possession, not supply

The defendant appealed against his conviction for growing cannabis with intent to supply. He was found to have 35 plants and appropriate equipment for preparing the produce for division and supply. He said that since the plants had no flowering heads, he was not yet in possession of the drug.
Held: The possession of the juvenile plants was sufficient to found the charge of possession, but he was not yet in possession of those parts of the plant which might be sold, and the charge of possession with intent to supply failed.
Richards LJ, Rafferty, Paget QC JJ
[2011] EWCA Crim 1180, [2011] 2 Cr App Rep 15
Bailii
Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 4(2)(b) 5(3)
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Auton and Others v Regina CACD 3-Feb-2011
The court heard appeals against sentence for small scale production of cannabis.
Held: The court considered the use to which the product of cultivation was to be put. Hughes LJ observed: ‘The proper inference as to what the cultivation . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 October 2021; Ref: scu.441299

Laskey, Jaggard and Brown v The United Kingdom: ECHR 19 Feb 1997

A prosecution for sado-masochist acts was a necessary invasion of privacy to protect health. The Court found no violation where applicants were imprisoned as a result of sado-masochistic activities captured on video tape when police obtained possession of them. Although all male defendants in that case consented, they were charged with assault and wounding and sentenced to imprisonment. There was no unjustifiable interference.
A criminal conviction cannot constitute an interference with the right to respect for private life under Article 8, unless there are special circumstances in a particular case calling for a different conclusion.
Times 20-Feb-1997, 21826/93, 21627/93, 21974/93, [1997] 24 EHRR 39, [1997] ECHR 4
Worldlii, Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights 8
Human Rights
Citing:
Appeal from – Regina v Brown (Anthony); Regina v Lucas; etc HL 11-Mar-1993
The appellants had been convicted of assault, after having engaged in consensual acts of sado-masochism in which they inflicted varying degreees of physical self harm. They had pleaded guilty after a ruling that the prosecution had not needed to . .
See Also – Regina v Brown etc CACD 15-Apr-1992
The defendants appealed against their convictions for offences under the 1861 Act of assaults inflicting injury. They said that as sado-masochists, they had mutually consented to the assaults and that no offences had been commited, but pleaded gulty . .

Cited by:
Cited – Pay v Lancashire Probation Service EAT 29-Oct-2003
The appellant challenged refusal of his claim for unfair dismissal. A probation officer, he had business interests in fire breathing and bondage merchandising which the service said were incompatible with his duties, and dismissed him. He complained . .
Cited – Regina v Dica CACD 5-May-2004
Reckless HIV transmission – Grievous Bodily Harm
The defendant appealed against his conviction for inflicting grievous bodily harm. He had HIV/Aids, and was found to have transmitted the disease by intercourse when the victims were not informed of his condition. It was not suggested that any rape . .
Cited – Regina v G (Secretary of State for the Home Department intervening) HL 18-Jun-2008
The defendant was fifteen. He was convicted of statutory rape of a 13 year old girl, believing her to be 15. He appealed saying that as an offence of strict liability he had been denied a right to a fair trial, and also that the offence charged was . .
Cited – Mosley v News Group Newspapers Ltd QBD 24-Jul-2008
mosley_newsgroupQBD2008
The defendant published a film showing the claimant involved in sex acts with prostitutes. It characterised them as ‘Nazi’ style. He was the son of a fascist leader, and a chairman of an international sporting body. He denied any nazi element, and . .
Cited – Gillberg v Sweden ECHR 3-Apr-2012
(Grand Chamber) The applicant, a consultant psychiatrist, had conducted research with children under undertakings of absolute privacy. Several years later a researcher, for proper reasons, obtained court orders for the disclosure of the data under . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.165472

Regina v Kohn: CACD 1979

An overdraft facility was property which could be the subject of a charge of theft. In the context of the presentation of a cheque, improperly presented to a bank but which the bank pays, it was a theft of a chose in action by the person who presented such a cheque. The company’s accountant appealed from his conviction, having used the lawful possession of the company’s cheque book to write cheques for his own gain.
The Court confirmed that the form of charge was appropriate: ‘The sequence of events in this case can be brought down to a simple series of facts. The defendant starts with a cheque book in his possession. It is the cheque book of the company and he is plainly in lawful possession of that book with the cheques inside it. He apparently had the habit, as we have already indicated, at least occasionally of removing blank cheques from the book, tearing out the cheque, leaving the counterfoil in position, putting the cheque in his pocket and filling it in at a later stage. Still nothing wrong at all in that. He is still acting lawfully, although it may be somewhat unusual. He then makes up his mind to fill in the cheque with the amount, then the payees and the date and so on. The third party in whose favour the cheques were being made were ex hypothesi not entitled not entitled these sums. The appellant was therefore using the company’s cheques and the company’s bank account for his own purposes. Ms Goddard suggests that there was a gradual appropriation as the events moved on in this way.
The next stage is this. He says to himself, ‘I am now going to make the cheques payable to [another individual]. This action is unknown to [the principal of the company]. It is ex hypothesi once again contrary to the interests of the company. It is contrary to the will of the company and it is dishonest. This is dealing with a cheque not as agent of the company duly authorised, but is dealing with the cheque as if it was his own. That seems to us sufficient to amount to an appropriation under the Act.’
(1979) 69 Cr App Rep 395, [1979] Crim LR 675
Theft Act 1968
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – JSC BTA Bank v Ablyazov SC 21-Oct-2015
The court was asked as to the interpretation and application of the standard form freezing order. In the course of long-running litigation between JSC BTA Bank and Mr Ablyazov the Bank had obtained a number of judgments against the respondent . .
Cited – The United States of America v Nolan SC 21-Oct-2015
Mrs Nolan had been employed at a US airbase. When it closed, and she was made redundant, she complained that the appellant had not consulted properly on the redundancies. The US denied that it had responsibility to consult, and now appealed.
Updated: 15 October 2021; Ref: scu.591725

Regina v Cort: CACD 7 Jul 2003

The defendant appealed a conviction for kidnapping, saying the victims’ absence of consent was not fundamental. Driving his car, he had stopped at bus stops, inviting women to get in saying falsely that the bus had been cancelled. He had with him articles clearly intended to facilitate rape.
Held: Following Regina -v- D, the victims’ consent had clearly been obtained by fraud. It had been submitted that as in cases of assault and rape, in law only mistakes as to identity or the nature of the act, could vitiate a consent. That contention was rejected. The nature of the consent in rape and assault cases was different. The absence of consent may not need to be proved. ‘It is difficult to see how one could ever consent to that once fraud was indeed established. The ‘nature’ of the act here is therefore taking the complainant away by fraud. The complainant did not consent to that event. All that she consented to was a ride in the car, which in itself is irrelevant to the offence and a different thing from that with which Mr Cort is charged.’
Buxton LJ, Mitting, Paget QC JJ
Times 23-Jul-2003, Gazette 18-Sep-2003, [2003] 3 WLR 1300, [2004] QB 388
England and Wales
Citing:
Applied – Regina v D HL 1984
D was convicted for kidnapping his 5-year old daughter, a ward of court, who was in the care and control of her mother. The CA held that there was no such offence as the kidnapping of a child under 14, that it could not be committed by a parent, and . .

Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Dica CACD 5-May-2004
Reckless HIV transmission – Grievous Bodily Harm
The defendant appealed against his conviction for inflicting grievous bodily harm. He had HIV/Aids, and was found to have transmitted the disease by intercourse when the victims were not informed of his condition. It was not suggested that any rape . .
Cited – Regina v Hendy-Freegard CACD 23-May-2007
The defendant against appealed his conviction for kidnapping. He had fraudulently taken control of his victims’ lives and fleeced them. He was said to have kidnapped them, originally by persuading them to get into his car and then driving off. He . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 14 October 2021; Ref: scu.185833

Regina v Dawson and James: CACD 1977

At Liverpool Pier Head a sailor on shore leave waiting for the ferry was surrounded by two men, one standing on either side of him, who nudged him on the shoulder, causing him to lose his balance. While trying to keep his balance, a third man got his hand into the sailor’s pocket and took his wallet. It was contended before the trial court that that did not amount to the offence of robbery. The judge left the offence to the jury, who convicted him. In giving the judgment of the court,
Held: Lawson LJ said:
‘The choice of the word ‘force’ is not without interest because under the Larceny Act 1916 the word ‘violence’ had been used, but Parliament deliberately on the advice of the Criminal Law Revision Committee changed that word ‘force’. Whether there is any difference between ‘violence’ or ‘force’ is not relevant for the purposes of this case; but the word is ‘force’. It is a word in ordinary use. It is a word which juries understand. The learned judge left it to the jury to say whether jostling a man in the way which the victim described to such an extent that he had difficulty in keeping his balance could be said to be the use of force. The learned judge, because of the argument put forward by Mr Locke, went out of his way to explain to the jury that force in these sort of circumstances must be substantial to justify a verdict.
Whether it was right for him to put that adjective before the word ‘force’ when Parliament had not done so we will not discuss for the purposes of this case. It was a matter for the jury. They were there to use their common sense and knowledge of the world. We cannot say that their decision as to whether force was used was wrong. They were entitled to the view that force was used.’
Lawson LJ
[1977] 64 Cr App R 170, [1978] 68 Cr App R 170
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Clouden CACD 1987
The appellant approached a woman who was carrying a shopping basket in her left hand from behind and wrenched it down and out of her grasp with both hands and ran off with it. He was convicted of robbery.
Held: His appeal was dismissed.
‘The . .
Cited – RP and Others v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 25-May-2012
Appeal from conviction for robbery – theft of cigarette out of victim’s hand.
Held: The appeal was allowed. The court recognised the distinction between force applied to the object and the person: ‘ This case falls squarely on the side of . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 September 2021; Ref: scu.618909

Regina v Clouden: CACD 1987

The appellant approached a woman who was carrying a shopping basket in her left hand from behind and wrenched it down and out of her grasp with both hands and ran off with it. He was convicted of robbery.
Held: His appeal was dismissed.
‘The old cases distinguished between force on the actual person and force on the property which in fact causes force on the person but, following Dawson and James, the court should direct attention to the words of the statute without referring to the old authorities. The old distinctions have gone. Whether the defendant used force on any person in order to steal is an issue that should be left to the jury. The judge’s direction to the jury was adequate. He told the jury quite clearly at the outset what the statutory definition was, though thereafter he merely used the word ‘force’ and did not use the expression ‘on the person’.’
(1987) Crim LR 56
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Dawson and James CACD 1977
At Liverpool Pier Head a sailor on shore leave waiting for the ferry was surrounded by two men, one standing on either side of him, who nudged him on the shoulder, causing him to lose his balance. While trying to keep his balance, a third man got . .

Cited by:
Cited – RP and Others v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 25-May-2012
Appeal from conviction for robbery – theft of cigarette out of victim’s hand.
Held: The appeal was allowed. The court recognised the distinction between force applied to the object and the person: ‘ This case falls squarely on the side of . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 September 2021; Ref: scu.618910

Human Rights Commission for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland : Abortion): SC 7 Jun 2018

The Commission challenged the compatibility of the NI law relating to banning nearly all abortions with Human Rights Law. It now challenged a decision that it did not have standing to bring the case.
Held: (Lady Hale, Lord Kerr and Lord Wilson dissenting) The Commission did not have standing, and a declaration could not be made. The Court did however consider the law, and a majority thought the current law was disproportionate and was incompatible with Article 8 to the extent that that law prohibits abortion in cases of (a) fatal foetal abnormality, (b) pregnancy as a result of rape and (c) pregnancy as a result of incest.
Lady Hale said: ‘It is more difficult to articulate the legitimate aim. It cannot be protecting the rights and freedoms of others, because the unborn are not the holders of rights under the Convention (Vo v France (2004) 40 EHRR 12) or under domestic law (In re MB (Medical Treatment) [1997] 2 FLR 426). But the community undoubtedly does have a moral interest in protecting the life, health and welfare of the unborn – it is that interest which underlies many areas of the law, including the regulation of assisted reproduction, and of the practice of midwifery, as well as of the termination of pregnancy. But the community also has an interest in protecting the life, health and welfare of the pregnant woman – that interest also underlies the regulation of assisted reproduction, of midwifery and of the termination of pregnancy. And pregnant women are undoubtedly rights-holders under the both the Convention and domestic law with autonomy as well as health and welfare rights. The question, therefore, is how the balance is to be struck between the two.’
Lady Hale, President, Lord Mance, Lord Kerr, Lord Wilson, Lord Reed, Lady Black, Lord Lloyd-Jones
[2018] UKSC 27, [2018] NI 228, 46 BHRC 1, [2019] 1 All ER 173, [2018] HRLR 14
Bailii, Bailii Summary, Supreme Court, SC Summary, SC Summary Video, SC Video 2017 Oct 24am, SC 2017 Oct 24 pm Video, SC Video 2017 Oct 25 am, SC 2017 Oct 25 pm Video, SC 2017 Oct 26 am Video, SC 2017 Oct 26 pm Video
Offences Against the Person Act 1861 58 59, Criminal Justice Act (NI) 1945 25(1), European Convention on Human Rights 8 14, Northern Ireland Act 1998
Northern Ireland
Citing:
Appeal from – The Attorney General for Northern Ireland and Another v The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission CANI 29-Jun-2017
Appeal by the Attorney General and Department of Justice against an Order declaring that sections 58 and 59 of the 1861 Act and section 25 of the 1945 Act were incompatible with Article 8 of ECHR insofar as it is an offence:
(i) to procure a . .
Cited – Rex v Bourne 1939
An eminent surgeon openly in a public hospital operated to terminate the pregnancy of a 14 year old girl who had become pregnant in consequence of a violent rape.
Held: The court suggested when summing up that there might be a duty in certain . .
Cited – In re MB (Medical Treatment) CA 26-Mar-1997
The patient was due to deliver a child. A delivery by cesarean section was necessary, but the mother had a great fear of needles, and despite consenting to the operation, refused the necessary consent to anesthesia in any workable form.
Held: . .
Cited – Pretty v The United Kingdom ECHR 29-Apr-2002
Right to Life Did Not include Right to Death
The applicant was paralysed and suffered a degenerative condition. She wanted her husband to be allowed to assist her suicide by accompanying her to Switzerland. English law would not excuse such behaviour. She argued that the right to die is not . .
Cited – In Re Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission Northern Ireland HL 20-Jun-2002
The coroner intended to hold an inquest into the deaths on the Omagh bombing. The Commission sought the right to be involved on the basis that human rights of interest to it might arise, and the coroner refused, saying that they had no standing to . .
Cited – Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2) HL 10-Jul-2003
The respondent appealed against a finding that the provision which made a loan agreement completely invalid for lack of compliance with the 1974 Act was itself invalid under the Human Rights Act since it deprived the respondent of its property . .
Cited – Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza HL 21-Jun-2004
Same Sex Partner Entitled to tenancy Succession
The protected tenant had died. His same-sex partner sought a statutory inheritance of the tenancy.
Held: His appeal succeeded. The Fitzpatrick case referred to the position before the 1998 Act: ‘Discriminatory law undermines the rule of law . .
Cited – Vo v France ECHR 8-Jul-2004
Hudoc Preliminary objection rejected (ratione materiae, non-exhaustion of domestic remedies) ; No violation of Art. 2
A doctor by negligence had caused the termination of a pregnancy at the 20 to 24 weeks . .
Cited – Family Planning Association of Northern Ireland v Minister for Health Social Services and Public Safety CANI 8-Oct-2004
A termination of pregnancy is lawful when its continuation would threaten the woman’s life or when it would probably affect her physical or mental health but only if the effect would be serious and, in particular, permanent or long-term . .
Cited – A, B And C v Ireland ECHR 16-Dec-2010
Grand Chamber – The Court considered the prohibition of abortion in Ireland: ‘The first two applicants principally complained under Article 8 about, inter alia, the prohibition of abortion for health and well-being reasons in Ireland and the third . .
Cited – Steinfeld and Another v Secretary of State for Education CA 21-Feb-2017
Hetero Partnerships – wait and see proportionate
The claimants, a heterosexual couple complained that their inability to have a civil partnership was an unlawful discrimination against them and a denial of their Article 8 rights. The argument that the appellants’ case did not come within the ambit . .
Cited – Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board SC 11-Mar-2015
Change in Doctors’ Information Obligations
The pursuer claimed that her obstetrician had been negligent, after her son suffered severe injury at birth. The baby faced a birth with shoulder dystocia – the inability of the shoulders to pass through the pelvis. The consultant considered that a . .
Cited – Klass And Others v Germany ECHR 6-Sep-1978
(Plenary Court) The claimant objected to the disclosure by the police of matters revealed during their investigation, but in this case, it was held, disclosure even after the event ‘might well jeopardise the long-term purpose that originally . .
Cited – Nicklinson and Another, Regina (on The Application of) SC 25-Jun-2014
Criminality of Assisting Suicide not Infringing
The court was asked: ‘whether the present state of the law of England and Wales relating to assisting suicide infringes the European Convention on Human Rights, and whether the code published by the Director of Public Prosecutions relating to . .
Cited – Stubing v Germany ECHR 12-Apr-2012
‘. . in cases arising from individual applications it is not the Court’s task to examine domestic legislation in the abstract. Rather, it must examine the manner in which the relevant legislation was applied to the applicant in the particular . .
Cited – In re P and Others, (Adoption: Unmarried couple) (Northern Ireland); In re G HL 18-Jun-2008
The applicants complained that as an unmarried couple they had been excluded from consideration as adopters.
Held: Northern Ireland legislation had not moved in the same way as it had for other jurisdictions within the UK. The greater . .
Cited – Taylor v Lancashire County Council and others CA 17-Mar-2005
The tenant occupied his farm under a lease limiting his use of the farm. He was found to be trading in breach of his covenant and a notice to quit was issued and possession sought. He argued that the 1986 Act was discriminatory and inadequate to . .
Cited – Chahal v The United Kingdom ECHR 15-Nov-1996
Proper Reply Opportunity Required on Deportation
(Grand Chamber) The claimant was an Indian citizen who had been granted indefinite leave to remain in this country but whose activities as a Sikh separatist brought him to the notice of the authorities both in India and here. The Home Secretary of . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Chahal Admn 22-Oct-1997
. .
Cited – The Christian Institute and Others v The Lord Advocate SC 28-Jul-2016
(Scotland) By the 2014 Act, the Scottish Parliament had provided that each child should have a named person to monitor that child’s needs, with information about him or her shared as necessary. The Institute objected that the imposed obligation to . .
Cited – Regina v Her Majesty’s Attorney General ex parte Rusbridger and Another HL 26-Jun-2003
Limit to Declaratory Refilef as to Future Acts
The applicant newspaper editor wanted to campaign for a republican government. Articles were published, and he sought confirmation that he would not be prosecuted under the Act, in the light of the 1998 Act.
Held: Declaratory relief as to the . .
Cited – Ali and Bibi, Regina (on The Applications of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 18-Nov-2015
At the claimants alleged that the rules requiring a foreign spouse or partner of a British citizen or a person settled in this country to pass a test of competence in the English language before coming to live here were an unjustifiable interference . .
Cited – Saadi v Italy (United Kingdom intervening) ECHR 28-Feb-2008
(Grand Chamber) When considering the appropriateness of a deportation order to a country with which the deporting country had a memorandum of understanding that the destination country would not torture the deportee, a court must look beyond the . .
Cited – Parochial Church Council of the Parish of Aston Cantlow and Wilmcote with Billesley, Warwickshire v Wallbank and another HL 26-Jun-2003
Parish Councils are Hybrid Public Authorities
The owners of glebe land were called upon as lay rectors to contribute to the cost of repairs to the local church. They argued that the claim was unlawful by section 6 of the 1998 Act as an act by a public authority incompatible with a Convention . .
Cited – MM (Lebanon) and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Another CA 11-Jul-2014
Aikens LJ said: ‘The court would not be entitled to strike down the rule unless satisfied that it was incapable of being operated in a proportionate way and so was inherently unjustified in all or nearly all cases.’ and ‘If the particular . .
Cited – Attorney-General’s Reference (No 3 of 1994) HL 24-Jul-1997
The defendant stabbed a pregnant woman. The child was born prematurely and died. The attack had been directed at the mother, and the proper offence was manslaughter.
Held: The only questions which need to be addressed are (1) whether the act . .
Cited – Gafgen v Germany ECHR 1-Jun-2010
(Grand Chamber) The claimant said that police treatment during his interview had amounted to torture.
Held: The Salduz principles were not restricted to the failure to provide access to a lawyer during interview. There is no clear consensus . .
Cited – Marckx v Belgium ECHR 13-Jun-1979
Recognition of illegitimate children
The complaint related to the manner in which parents were required to adopt their own illegitimate child in order to increase his rights. Under Belgian law, no legal bond between an unmarried mother and her child results from the mere fact of birth. . .
Cited – Stec and Others v United Kingdom ECHR 12-Apr-2006
(Grand Chamber) The claimants said that differences between the sexes in the payment of reduced earning allowances and retirement allowances were sex discrimination.
Held: The differences were not infringing sex discrimination. The differences . .
Cited – RR v Poland ECHR 26-May-2011
The applicant learned of possible malformation of the foetus from an ultrasound at the 18-week stage. Her repeated requests for genetic tests were met with procrastination, confusion and a lack of proper counselling and information, and it was not . .
Cited – Ilhan v Turkey ECHR 27-Jun-2000
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection dismissed (victim); Preliminary objection dismissed (non-exhaustion); No violation of Art. 2; Violation of Art. 3; Violation of Art. 13; . .
Cited – Tysiac v Poland ECHR 16-Mar-2007
The complainant complained about the failure to afford her an abortion in circumstances where she had an understandable fear that giving birth would lead to her losing her already poor sight, leading to a further six-months of pregnancy and a . .
Cited – P and S v Poland ECHR 30-Oct-2012
P aged 14 became pregnant due to rape, evidenced by bruises. Polish law permitted an abortion in such circumstances, but the reality of its practical implementation was in striking discordance with the theoretical right. P was given contradictory . .
Cited – Open Door and Dublin Well Woman v Ireland ECHR 29-Oct-1992
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Lack of jurisdiction (Art. 8); Preliminary objection rejected (victim); Preliminary objection rejected (six month period); Preliminary objection rejected . .
Cited – Opuz v Turkey ECHR 9-Jun-2009
The applicant alleged, in particular, that the State authorities had failed to protect her and her mother from domestic violence, which had resulted in the death of her mother and her own ill-treatment. . .
Cited – Attorney General v X 5-Mar-1992
(Supreme Court of Ireland) Refusal of abortion following a rape . .
Cited – MacFarlane and Another v Tayside Health Board HL 21-Oct-1999
Child born after vasectomy – Damages Limited
Despite a vasectomy, Mr MacFarlane fathered a child, and he and his wife sought damages for the cost of care and otherwise of the child. He appealed a rejection of his claim.
Held: The doctor undertakes a duty of care in regard to the . .
Cited – Parkinson v St James and Seacroft University Hospital NHS Trust CA 11-Apr-2001
A mother had undergone a negligent sterilisation, and in due course she gave birth to a disabled child.
Held: The right to bodily integrity is the first and most important of the interests protected by the law of tort. The cases saying that . .
Cited – Regina v Z (Attorney General for Northern Ireland’s Reference) HL 19-May-2005
The defendants appealed their convictions for being members of proscribed organisations. They were members of the ‘Real IRA’, but only the IRA was actually proscribed.
Held: The appeals failed. In construing an Act of Parliament it may be of . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Health ex parte Quintavalle (on behalf of Pro-Life Alliance) HL 13-Mar-2003
Court to seek and Apply Parliamentary Intention
The appellant challenged the practice of permitting cell nuclear replacement (CNR), saying it was either outside the scope of the Act, or was for a purpose which could not be licensed under the Act.
Held: The challenge failed. The court was to . .
Cited – Regina v Director of Public Prosecutions, ex parte Kebilene and others HL 28-Oct-1999
(Orse Kebeline) The DPP’s appeal succeeded. A decision by the DPP to authorise a prosecution could not be judicially reviewed unless dishonesty, bad faith, or some other exceptional circumstance could be shown. A suggestion that the offence for . .
Cited – Egmez v Cyprus ECHR 21-Dec-2000
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 3; No violation of Art. 5-1; No violation of Art. 5-2; No violation of Art. 5-3; No violation of Art. 5-4; Violation of Art. 13; No separate issue . .
Cited – Gafgen v Germany ECHR 30-Jun-2008
(Fifth Section) The claimant said that having been arrested by police, their treatment of him amounted to torture.
Held: Iit was not necessary to rule on the Government’s preliminary objection of non-exhaustion of domestic remedies. It held, . .
Cited – Krastanov v Bulgaria ECHR 30-Sep-2004
ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 3; Violation of Art. 6-1; Not necessary to examine P1-1; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention . .
Cited – The Sunday Times (No 1) v The United Kingdom ECHR 26-Apr-1979
Offence must be ;in accordance with law’
The court considered the meaning of the need for an offence to be ‘in accordance with law.’ The applicants did not argue that the expression prescribed by law required legislation in every case, but contended that legislation was required only where . .
Cited – Mayeka and Mitunga v Belgium ECHR 12-Oct-2006
A five-year-old child was detained by the Belgian authorities in an immigration centre.
Held: The court assessed the impact of the treatment on the applicant, stating that her position was: ‘characterised by her very young age, the fact that . .
Cited – Wiktorko v Poland ECHR 31-Mar-2009
. .
Cited – Mouvement Raelien Suisse v Switzerland ECHR 13-Jan-2011
The applicant association alleged that the banning of its posters by the Swiss authorities had breached its right to freedom of religion and its right to freedom of expression, as guaranteed by Articles 9 and 10 of the Convention respectively. . .
Cited – Lord Carlile of Berriew QC, and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 12-Nov-2014
The claimant had supported the grant of a visa to a woman in order to speak to members of Parliament who was de facto leader of an Iranian organsation which had in the past supported terrorism and had been proscribed in the UK, but that proscription . .
Cited – Nada v Switzerland (GC) ECHR 12-Sep-2012
(Grand Chamber) ‘The court has previously found that, for a measure to be regarded as proportionate and as necessary in a democratic society, the possibility of recourse to an alternative measure that would cause less damage to the fundamental right . .
Cited – Sufi and Elmi v The United Kingdom ECHR 28-Jun-2011
The risk of the applicants being subjected to treatment which would violate article 3 if returned to Somalia meant that the British authorities would be in breach of the article if they carried through their intention to deport them to that country. . .
Cited – Quila and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 12-Oct-2011
Parties challenged the rule allowing the respondent to deny the right to enter or remain here to non EU citizens marrying a person settled and present here where either party was under the age of 21. The aim of the rule was to deter forced . .

Cited by:
Cited – Crowter and Others, Regina (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Health And Social Care Admn 23-Sep-2021
Foetus has no Established Human Rights
The Claimants sought a declaration that section 1(1)(d) of the Abortion Act 1967, as amended, is incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights (‘ECHR’), as well as some other remedies. The claimant had Down’s Syndrome, and complained the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 26 September 2021; Ref: scu.617206

Bath and North East Somerset District Council v Warman: Admn 19 Nov 1998

A fifteen year old girl absented herself from school when she went to live with a boyfriend at an address which was not known to her mother. The justices acquitted the mother for failing to secure her attendance at school on the basis of ‘any unavoidable cause’ but the prosecutor’s appeal to the Divisional Court was allowed for the same reasons as in Jenkins v Howels and Crump v. Gilmore, both of which were followed.
Held: The construction placed of this statutory provision in the authorities makes the conclusion inescapable that the circumstances did not give rise to unavoidable cause for the child’s absence from school.
Lord Justice Rose
[1999] ELR 81, [1998] EWHC Admin 1078
Bailii
Education Act 1993 444
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – Berezovsky and Another v Forbes Inc and Another CA 27-Nov-1998
Where a defamatory article was published in many jurisdictions, there is no rule preventing a plaintiff recovering in those jurisdictions where a remedy is given. Not confined by restriction to most appropriate jurisdiction. . .
Cited – Isle of Wight Council v Platt SC 6-Apr-2017
Regular school attendance is following the rules
The respondent had taken his child out of school during term time to go on holiday. The child otherwise had an excellent attendance record. The Council having failed on appeal to the Administrative Court, it appealed saying that the word ‘regularly’ . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 14 September 2021; Ref: scu.139199

Liewe Hoekstra and Jan Van Rijs and Ronny Van Rijs and Hendrik Van Rijs v Hm Advocate: HCJ 14 Apr 2000

A judge, having given judgment in an appeal case involving the application of the convention on Human Rights, wrote and published an article critical of the convention, and of its application in national law. The appeal decision was set aside, since the reality or appearance of objective impartiality which was clearly required by both common law and the convention had been lost. The requirement for impartiality was both objective and subjective.
Lord Justice General and Lady Cosgrove and Lord Sutherland
Times 14-Apr-2000, [2000] ScotHC 32
Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights
Scotland
Citing:
See Also – Note of Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence By Lieuwe Hoekstra and Jan Van Rijs and Ronny Van Rijs and Hendrik Van Rijs v Her Majesty’s Advocate HCJ 28-Jan-2000
. .
See Also – Lieuwe Hoekstra and Jan Van Rijs and Ronny Van Rijs and Endrik Van Rijs v Her Majesty’s Advocate HCJ 7-Mar-2000
. .

Cited by:
See Also – Lieuwe Hoekstra and Jan Van Rijs and Ronny Van Rijs and Hendrik Van Rijs v Her Majesty’s Advocate HCJ 2-Jun-2000
. .
See Also – Hoekstra and Others v Her Majesty’s Advocate High Court of Justiciary PC 26-Oct-2000
The Privy Council has no standing to act as a general court of appeal on Scottish law. The jurisdiction given to it by the Act, was limited as prescribed by the Act to what are called devolution issues, issues related to the acts of devolution. Not . .
See Also – Hoekstra and Van Rijs etc v Her Majesty’s Advocate HCJ 18-Jan-2001
. .
See Also – Hoekstra and Van Rijs and Van Rijs and Van Rijs v Her Majesty’s Advocate HCJ 23-Jan-2002
. .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 14 September 2021; Ref: scu.81423

Rex v Berg and others: CCA 1927

The defendants were said to have conducted a disorderly house in providing exhibitions of a perverted nature.
Held: The common law offence of keeping a disorderly house is committed when the house is so conducted as to violate law and good order. Letters found in such a house referring to unnatural practices may be put in evidence of such use.
(1927) 20 Cr App R 38
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Court, Regina v CACD 9-Feb-2012
The defendants appealed against their convictions under common law for keeping a disorderly house. They were landlords using an agreement requiring the tenant not to be used for immoral purposes. There was evidence of limited sexual activity. Only . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 05 September 2021; Ref: scu.451143

An NHS Trust and Others v Y and Another: SC 30 Jul 2018

The court was asked whether a court order must always be obtained before clinically assisted nutrition and hydration, which is keeping alive a person with a prolonged disorder of consciousness, can be withdrawn, or whether, in some circumstances, this can occur without court involvement. The Official Solicitor appealed from the grant of a declaration.
Held: The appeal failed. It was not established law that a court’s permission was required. The question facing anyone considering treatment of a patient not able to make his or her own decision is not whether it is lawful to withdraw treatment, but rather the legality of giving it. Treatment is lawful only if it is in the patient’s best interests. A doctor carrying out treatment in the reasonable belief that it will be in the patient’s best interests, is entitled to the protection from liability conferred by section 5 of the 2005 Act. Airedale v Bland did not impose such a requirement. Where the situation was not clear than a court application was appropriate.
Lady Hale, President, Lord Mance, Lord Wilson, Lord Hodge, Lady Black
[2018] UKSC 46, (2018) 21 CCL Rep 410, [2019] AC 978, (2018) 163 BMLR 1, [2018] WLR(D) 490, [2018] 3 WLR 751, UKSC 2017/0202
Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD, SC, SC Summary, SC Summary Video, SC 2018 Feb 26 am Video, SC 2018 Feb 26 pm Video, SC 2018 Feb 27 am Video
Mental Capacity Act 2005 42(1), European Convention on Human Rights
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – NHS Trust v Y and Another QBD 13-Nov-2017
Claim for a declaration under CPR Part 8 that it is not mandatory to bring before the Court the withdrawal of Clinically Assisted Nutrition and Hydration (‘CANH’) from a patient who has a prolonged disorder of consciousness in circumstances where . .
Cited – In re F (Mental Patient: Sterilisation) HL 4-May-1989
Where a patient lacks capacity, there is the power to provide him with whatever treatment or care is necessary in his own best interests. Medical treatment can be undertaken in an emergency even if, through a lack of capacity, no consent had been . .
Cited – Airedale NHS Trust v Bland HL 4-Feb-1993
Procedures on Withdrawal of Life Support Treatment
The patient had been severely injured in the Hillsborough disaster, and had come to be in a persistent vegetative state (PVS). The doctors sought permission to withdraw medical treatment. The Official Solicitor appealed against an order of the Court . .
Cited – Glass v The United Kingdom ECHR 9-Mar-2004
The applicant’s adult son was disabled. There was a disagreement with the hospital about his care. The hospital considered that to alleviate his distress, he should not be resuscitated. The family wanted to take him home, fearing euthanasia. The . .
Cited – Burke, Regina (on the Application of) v General Medical Council and others (Official Solicitor and others intervening) CA 28-Jul-2005
The claimant suffered a congenital degenerative brain condition inevitably resulting in a future need to receive nutrition and hydration by artificial means. He was concerned that a decision might be taken by medical practitioners responsible for . .
Cited – Aintree University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust v James SC 30-Oct-2013
The hospital where a gravely ill man had been treated had asked for a declaration that it would be in his best interests to withhold certain life-sustaining treatments from him. When can it be in the best interests of a living patient to withhold . .
Cited – Director of Legal Aid Casework and Others v Briggs CA 31-Jul-2017
Orse In re Briggs (Incapacitated Person) . .
Cited – SCC v MSA and Another CoP 20-Sep-2017
Orse In re M (Incapacitated Person: Withdrawal of Treatment)
The court was concerned with the withdrawal of CANH from a woman who was suffering from Huntington’s disease and was in a minimally conscious state. Her family, her clinicians, and a . .
Cited – W v M S and Others CoP 28-Sep-2011
Orse – In re M (Adult Patient) (Minimally Conscious State: Withdrawal of Treatment)
The case concerned a woman in a minimally conscious state, Baker J expressed the view that ‘all decisions about the proposed withholding or withdrawal of ANH . .
Cited – LB (Plastics) Ltd v Swish Products Ltd ChD 1979
Whitford J said: ‘The cases since the Act of 1911 have, however, I think quite plainly established that no originality of thought is needed to sustain a claim to copyright. Under copyright ideas are not protected, only the skill and labour needed to . .
Cited – In re Briggs (Incapacitated Person) 2018
. .

Cited by:
Cited – N v ACCG and Others SC 22-Mar-2017
The local authority and a young man’s parents disputed his continued care, he having substantial incapacities. The parents wanted assistance caring for him on visits home. The LA declined to fund that support. The LA now argued that the CoP had not . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 05 September 2021; Ref: scu.620170

Regina v Chan-Fook: CACD 15 Nov 1993

‘Actual bodily harm’ under the 1861 Act, may include injury to any part of the body, including internal organs, the nervous system and the brain. It is capable of including psychiatric injury, but not mere emotion such as fear, distress or panic. ‘Similarly an injury can be caused to someone by injuring their health; an assault may have the consequence of infecting the victim with a disease or causing the victim to become ill. The injury may be internal and may not be accompanied by any external injury.’ . . and: ‘In any case where psychiatric injury is relied upon as the basis for an allegation of bodily harm, and the matter has not been admitted by the defence, expert evidence should be called by the prosecution. It should not be left to be inferred by the jury from the general facts of the case. In the absence of appropriate expert evidence, a question whether or not the assault occasioning psychiatric injury should not be left to the jury . . There is no reason for refusing to have regard to psychiatric injury as the consequence of an assault if there is properly qualified evidence that it has occurred.’ and
‘In the case of Attia, the Court of Appeal discussed where the borderline should be drawn between, on the one hand, the emotions of distress and grief and on the other hand some actual psychiatric illness such as anxiety, neurosis or a reactive depression. The authorities recognised that there is a line to be drawn and whether any given case falls on one side or the other is a matter for expert evidence. The civil cases are also concerned with the broader question of the boundaries of the law of negligence and the duty of care, which do not concern us.
Accordingly, the phrase ‘actual bodily harm’ is capable of including psychiatric injury. But it does not include mere emotion such as fear, distress or panic, nor does it include, as such, states of mind that are not themselves evidence of some identifiable clinical condition. The phrase ‘state of mind’ is not a scientific one and should be avoided in considering whether or not the psychiatric injury has been caused; its use is likely to create in the minds of the jury the impression that something which is no more than a strong emotion, such as extreme fear or panic, can amount to actual bodily harm. It cannot. Similarly, juries should not be directed that an assault which causes a hysterical and nervous condition is an assault occasioning actual bodily harm. Where there is evidence that the assault has caused some psychiatric injury, the jury should be directed that injury is capable of amounting to actual bodily harm; otherwise there should be no reference to the mental state of the victim following the assault unless it be relevant to some other aspect of the case, as it was in Roberts’.
Hobhouse J
Times 19-Nov-1993, Ind Summary 15-Nov-1993, [1994] 99 Cr App R 147
Offences Against the Person Act 1861 47
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Dica CACD 5-May-2004
Reckless HIV transmission – Grievous Bodily Harm
The defendant appealed against his conviction for inflicting grievous bodily harm. He had HIV/Aids, and was found to have transmitted the disease by intercourse when the victims were not informed of his condition. It was not suggested that any rape . .
Approved – Regina v Burstow, Regina v Ireland HL 24-Jul-1997
The defendant was accused of assault occasioning actual bodily harm when he had made silent phone calls which were taken as threatening.
Held: An assault might consist of the making of a silent telephone call in circumstances where it causes . .
Cited – Regina v Ireland CACD 14-May-1996
Silent telephone calls which resulted in psychiatric damage to the victim could constitute an ‘assault occasioning actual bodily harm’ for the purposes of section 47 of the 1861 Act. Swinton Thomas LJ said: ‘The early cases pre-date the invention of . .
Cited – Regina v Burstow Admn 29-Jul-1996
Grievous bodily harm can be inflicted by a stalker without direct physical contact and can include psychological damage. The statute could be interpreted to reflect current standards. . .
Cited – Regina v Morris CACD 22-Oct-1997
An allegation of assault occasioning bodily harm, where the harm alleged was of a purely psychological nature, must be supported by psychiatric evidence. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 24 August 2021; Ref: scu.86328

Regina v Ireland: CACD 14 May 1996

Silent telephone calls which resulted in psychiatric damage to the victim could constitute an ‘assault occasioning actual bodily harm’ for the purposes of section 47 of the 1861 Act. Swinton Thomas LJ said: ‘The early cases pre-date the invention of the telephone. We must apply the law to conditions as they are in the twentieth century’. ‘In our judgment the making of a telephone call followed by silence, or a series of telephone calls, is capable of amounting to a relevant act for the purposes of section 47. The act consists in the making of the telephone call, and it does not matter whether words or silence ensue. There is no doubt that the telephone calls made the victims apprehensive. Equally, there is no doubt that they caused them psychological damage. In our judgment, once the fear and the damage are established, then when a telephone call is made by the appellant and the victim lifts the telephone and then knows that the man is telephoning them yet again, they will be apprehensive of suffering the very psychological damage from which they did suffer, namely palpitations, difficulty in breathing, cold sweats, anxiety, inability to sleep, dizziness, stress, and the like. As in the case of Smith, these victims would not know what the appellant was going to do next. In most cases an assault is likely to involve direct physical violence to the body. However, the fact that the violence is inflicted indirectly, causing psychological harm, does not render the act to be any less an act of violence. Nor, in our judgment, is it necessary that there should be an immediate proximity between defendant and victim. Fear can be instilled as readily over the telephone as it can through the window. In our judgment repetitious telephone calls of this nature are likely to cause the victims to apprehend immediate and unlawful violence. ‘
Swinton Thomas LJ, Longmore LJ
Times 22-May-1996, Gazette 19-Jun-1996, [1996] EWCA Crim 441, [1997] QB 114
Bailii
Offences Against the Person Act 1861 47
England and Wales
Citing:
Appealed to – Regina v Burstow, Regina v Ireland HL 24-Jul-1997
The defendant was accused of assault occasioning actual bodily harm when he had made silent phone calls which were taken as threatening.
Held: An assault might consist of the making of a silent telephone call in circumstances where it causes . .
Cited – Tuberville v Savage 1669
Tuberville laid his hand upon his sword saying, ‘If it were not Assize time I would not take such language.’ It was held that the act could have amounted to an assault but for ‘the declaration that he would not assault him, the Judges being in . .
Cited – Fagan v Metropolitan Commissioner 31-Jul-1968
The defendant was told by a police officer to park up his car. He did so, but stopped with his wheel, trapping the officer’s foot. The magistrates were unable to decide whether the parking on the officer’s foot was deliberate, but agreed that . .
Cited – Manchester Diocesan Council for Education v Commercial and General Investments Ltd 1969
The school governors were required to obtain consent before selling land formerly used as a school.
Held: The court rejected a submission that that consent was a necessary pre-requisite for a contract could be made at all: ‘Reliance is placed . .
Cited – Smith v Chief Superintendent, Woking Police Station 1983
The defendant entered the garden of a private house and looked through the windows of the house occupied by the victim. She was terrified. The Justices concluded that the defendant had deliberately frightened the victim, and that that constituted an . .
Cited – Regina v Chan-Fook CACD 15-Nov-1993
‘Actual bodily harm’ under the 1861 Act, may include injury to any part of the body, including internal organs, the nervous system and the brain. It is capable of including psychiatric injury, but not mere emotion such as fear, distress or panic. . .
Cited – Regina v Savage; Director of Public Prosecutions v Parmenter HL 7-Nov-1991
The first defendant had been convicted of wounding. She had intended to throw beer over her victim, but her glass slipped from her hand, and cut the victim. The second defendant threw his three year old child in the air and caught him, not realising . .
Approved – Barton v Armstrong 1969
(Supreme Court of New South Wales) The claimant sought damages alleging assault by the making of telephone calls.
Held: Threats made over the telephone were capable of amounting to an assault. Taylor J: ‘Mr. Staff’s first and second . .

Cited by:
Appeal from – Regina v Burstow, Regina v Ireland HL 24-Jul-1997
The defendant was accused of assault occasioning actual bodily harm when he had made silent phone calls which were taken as threatening.
Held: An assault might consist of the making of a silent telephone call in circumstances where it causes . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 24 August 2021; Ref: scu.148105

Blaikie v British Transport Commission: 1961

The court said that it was necessary for the law to come to a compromise with the doctrine of causation; expediency and good sense dictated that for practical purposes a line had to be drawn somewhere and, in doing so, the court was to be guided by the practical experience of the reasonable man rather than by the theoretical speculations of the philosopher.
Lord Justice-Clerk Thomson
1961 SC 44
Scotland
Cited by:
Cited – Kane v HM Advocate; MacAngus v HM Advocate HCJ 27-Jan-2009
The defendants appealed against convictions for culpable homicide. In each case they had supplied a drug to the victim who had then self-administered the drug and died as a consequence.
Held: The appeals failed. The court considered whether . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 August 2021; Ref: scu.332842

Noye, Regina v: CACD 10 Oct 2001

[2001] EWCA Crim 2229
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
First Appeal – Noye, Kenneth, Regina v CACD 22-Mar-2011
noye_rCACD0311
The prisoner appealed against his conviction for murder on reference from the CCRC. There were new doubts about the reliabiity of the expert forensic expert.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. Dr H’s evidence did not impinge on the essential . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 05 August 2021; Ref: scu.424974

Regina v Lee: CACD 19 Oct 2000

It was not a requirement on a charge of assault with intent to resist arrest, to establish that the defendant’s believed that the arrest was unlawful. The mens rea required to be established was that the defendant knew he was being arrested. A belief that the arrest was unlawful did not justify resisting the arrest.
Gazette 19-Oct-2000
Offences against the Person Act 1861 38
England and Wales

Updated: 05 August 2021; Ref: scu.87140

Khaled and Another v The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and Others: Admn 15 Jun 2017

The Claimants were designated by the UN Sanctions Committee in 2007 and 2008 respectively as individuals suspected of being associated with Al-Qaida and the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, and of being involved in terrorism. They sought judicial review of the decisions following that designation.
Jay J
[2017] EWHC 1422 (Admin)
Bailii
Justice and Security Act 2013
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Belhaj and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another SC 4-Jul-2018
Challenge to decision not to prosecute senior Intelligence Service officials for alleged offences in connection with his unlawful rendition and mistreatment in Libya. The issue here was whether on the hearing of the application for judicial review, . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 July 2021; Ref: scu.588884

Regina v Pawlicki; Regina v Swindell: CACD 3 Jun 1992

P had driven to an auctioneer’s showroom, parked outside and locked the car. He left three sawn-off shotguns inside, and went into the auction house and stood a few feet from S. Police officers had been alerted to the possibility of a robbery and arrested them both. P and S were convicted inter alia of having firearms with intent to commit robbery contrary to section 18.
Held: The defendant was properly convicted of having a firearm with intent to rob despite the gun being in a car 50 yards away from the offence. The phrase ‘having with him a firearm’ is to be construed purposely. The section imported an element of propinquity which is not required for mere possession. The emphasis was on the accessibility of the guns to those embarking on committing an indictable offence, rather than on the exact distance between them and the guns.
Gazette 03-Jun-1992, Gazette 26-Aug-1992, [1992] 1 WLR 827
Firearms Act 1968 18(1)
England and Wales

Updated: 29 July 2021; Ref: scu.87533

Regina v Bogacki: CACD 1973

The three defendants had been charged with attempting to take a motor bus without authority. They had gone to a bus garage late at night and attempted to start the engine of a bus without success. The trial judge directed the jury as follows, adverting specifically to the change of language between section 12 of the Act of 1968 and section 217 of the Act of 1960. He said: ‘The offence is not, I repeat, the offence is not taking and driving away, it is merely taking and taking, members of the jury, means assuming possession of an object for your own unauthorised use, however temporary that assumption of possession might be. Kay I give you an example. Suppose that you left your motor car parked in the car park behind a cinema, and you forgot to lock the door but you shut the door, and suppose that a man and a woman, some time later, when the motor car was unattended, came along, opened the door, got into the car, and had sexual intercourse in the car. This particular offence would then have been committed by them’. Later he said with respect to the defendants before him: ‘The question is: Did they, without the permission of the owners, acquire possession, for however short a time, for their own unauthorised purpose? That is the question.’
Held: Roskill LJ said: ‘ ‘The word ‘take’ is an ordinary simple English word and it is undesirable that where Parliament has used an ordinary simple English word elaborate glosses should be put upon it. What is sought to be said is that ‘take’ is the equivalent of ‘use’ and that mere unauthorised user of itself constitutes an offence against section 12. It is to be observed that if one treats ‘takes’ as a synonym for ‘uses’, the subsection has to be read in this way: ‘if . . he uses any conveyance for his own or another’s use . . ‘ That involves the second employment of the word ‘use’ being tautologous, and this court can see no justification where Parliament has used the phrase ‘if . . he takes any conveyance for his own or another’s use’ for construing this language as meaning if he ‘uses any conveyance for his own or another’s use,’ thus giving no proper effect to the words ‘for his own or another’s use.’ For those reasons the court accepts Mr. Lowry’s submission that there is still built in, if I may use the phrase, to the word ‘takes’ in the subsection the concept of movement and that before a man can be convicted of the completed offence under section 12 (1) it must be shown that he took the vehicle, that is to say, that there was an unauthorised taking possession or control of the vehicle by him adverse to the rights of the true owner or person otherwise entitled to such possession or control, coupled with some movement, however small . . of that vehicle following such unauthorised taking.’
Roskill LJ
[1973] 1 QB 832
Theft Act 1968 12, Traffic Act 1960 217
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Bow CACD 24-Nov-1976
The defendant appealed against his conviction for taking a motor vehicle without authority.
Held: Bridge LJ said: ‘where as here, a conveyance is taken and moved in a way which necessarily involves its use as a conveyance, the taker cannot be . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 24 July 2021; Ref: scu.544330

Aslam, Regina v: CACD 22 Oct 2004

The appellant had pleaded guilty to a number of offences of dishonesty and asked for a number of others to be taken into consideration. One of the offences to which he had pleaded guilty and one of those which he had asked to be taken into consideration had occurred before the coming into force of the 1995 Act. On this account, it was argued on his behalf that the court had no jurisdiction to make a confiscation order under the 1995 legislation.
Held: The argument was rejected.
Bean J said: ‘The legislative purpose of section 16(5), as it seems to us, was to prevent the Crown from dividing convictions against a defendant in one set of proceedings into pre- and post-November 1, 1995 matters and then taking confiscation proceedings (concurrently or consecutively) under both statutes. So, if at the time the judge is asked to make a confiscation order under the 1995 Act on a number of counts there remains a pre-commencement count on which the Crown is seeking, or could still seek, a confiscation order under the 1988 Act as amended in 1993, there is no jurisdiction to make an order under the 1995 Act. However, if the pre-commencement count is one which could not be the basis of confiscation proceedings, there is no obstacle to using the 1995 Act regime. Similarly, if (as in this case) the Crown has expressly abandoned any reliance on the pre-commencement count for the purposes of a confiscation order, the fact that it could have sought such an order in respect of that count seems to us entirely immaterial. In such a case also, in our judgment, there is no obstacle to using in the 1995 Act regime in respect of the post-commencement counts. We do not understand Simpson to require a contrary conclusion.’
Bean J
[2004] EWCA Crim 2801, [2005] 1 Cr App R (S) 116
Bailii
Proceeds of Crime Act 1995 16(5)
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Sekhon, etc v Regina CACD 16-Dec-2002
The defendants appealed against confiscation orders on the basis that in various ways, the Crown had failed to comply with procedural requirements.
Held: The courts must remember the importance of such procedures in the fight against crime, . .

Cited by:
Cited – McCool, Regina v SC 2-May-2018
The appellants complained that the recovery order made against them in part under the transitional provisions were unlawful. They had claimed benefits as single people but were married to each other and for a house not occupied. The difficulty was . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 July 2021; Ref: scu.226784

Regina v KJ Martin: CACD 20 Feb 2003

The defendant had been found unfit to plead on a charge of murder. Charges against the co-defendants were later reduced to inflicting grievous bodily harm, but when the defendant came to be dealt with, it was on the basis that the charge remained murder. The sole evidence against him was from a witness whose evidence was read because of his fear. He challenged the fairness of a trial in which the substantial evidence against him was not tested under cross examination.
Held: It could not be a rule of law that a witness’s evidence could not be read, where he was the only witness against the defendant. This would make the section of the 1988 Act otiose. A decision made by jury under a section 4A hearing was as to the actus reus only, and not as to intent. Here, however, the question was as to the defendant’s knowledge that another might commit a crime. Antoine says that a court should look to the physical acts of the defendant, and bear in mind the social purpose of the legislation. It must be recognised that the distinction is not always clear. The admission of evidence need not always be unfair, but in these circumstances the inability to tst the central witness in the case was fundamental. The witness may have had reasons not to tell the truth.
Lord Justice Potter The Honourable Mr Justice Mackay
[2003] 2 Cr App R 322, [2003] EWCA Crim 357
Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights, Criminal Justice Act 1988 23, Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 4A, European Convention on Human Rights
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Antoine HL 30-Mar-2000
The appellant sought to argue that despite having been found unfit to plead under the 1964 Act, it was still open to him to argue that the defence under section 2 of the 1957 Act applied, and that he was entitled to be plead diminished . .
Cited – Regina v O’Loughlin and McLoughlin 1988
. .
Cited – Regina v Powell (Anthony) and Another; Regina v English HL 30-Oct-1997
When the court looked at the issue of foreseeability of murder in an allegation of joint enterprise, there was no requirement to show intent by the secondary party. The forseeability of the risk of the principal committing the offence from the point . .
Cited – Unterpertinger v Austria ECHR 24-Nov-1986
The defendant was convicted of causing actual bodily harm, mainly on the basis of statements which his wife and daughter had given to the police. His wife and daughter took advantage of their right not to give evidence at his trial and so could not . .

Cited by:
Cited – Sellick and Sellick, Regina v CACD 14-Mar-2005
The defendants appealed convictions for murder saying that the court had had read to it the statements of four witnesses who refused to attend for fear, having been intimidated. Other witnesses had been unco-operative and had been treated by the . .
Cited – Grant v The Queen PC 16-Jan-2006
(Jamaica) The defendant appealed his conviction for murder saying that the admission of an unsworn statement by one witness and the non-admission of another similar statement who did not either attend court was unconstitutional. He shot the victim . .
Cited – Regina v Davis HL 18-Jun-2008
The defendant had been tried for the murder of two men by shooting them at a party. He was identified as the murderer by three witnesses who had been permitted to give evidence anonymously, from behind screens, because they had refused, out of fear, . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 July 2021; Ref: scu.179577

Regina v Broch, Regina v Wyner: CACD 28 Dec 2000

On a charge allowing premises to be used for the supply of drugs, the defendant’s belief that he had taken sufficient steps to prevent drugs being supplied, was not a sufficient defence. The standard to be applied was the jury’s assessment, not that of the defendant. In this case the prosecution alleged that, given the degree of activity at the premises, the defendants must have known of the sale of drugs. Once the defendants knew that drugs were being sold, they had to take all reasonable and effective steps to prevent dealing. The word ‘reasonable’ did not have a subjective element.
Times 28-Dec-2000
Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 8(b)
England and Wales

Updated: 19 July 2021; Ref: scu.86227

McNally v Regina: CACD 27 Jun 2013

A teenage woman impersonated a teenage man and secured the consent of another young woman on that basis to engage in digital penetrative activity.
Held: A victim’s consent to a sexual penetration might be destroyed by a defendant’s deception as to gender. Vitiating deceptions are not limited to deceptions relating to features of the offence.
Sir Brian Leveson P, giving the judgment of the court, concluded at para. 26 that the nature of the sexual act was ‘on any common-sense view, different where the complainant is deliberately deceived by the defendant into believing that the latter is male.’ The complainant ‘chose to have sexual encounters with a boy and her preference (her freedom whether or not to have a sexual encounter with a girl) was removed by the appellant’s deception.’
Leveson LJ, Kenneth Parker, Stewart JJ
[2013] EWCA Crim 1051, [2014] 1 QB 593, [2014] 2 WLR 200, [2013] 2 Cr App R 28, [2013] WLR(D) 256
Bailii, WLRD
Sexual Offences Act 2003 2
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Monica, Regina (on The Application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 14-Dec-2018
Deception as to identity did not undermine consent
The claimant had been an environmental campaigner. She had had a sexual relationship with a man who was unknown to her an undercover police officer. She now challenged the decision not to prosecute him for rape.
Held: Her claim failed. Case . .
Cited – Lawrance, Regina v CACD 23-Jul-2020
Consent not removed by Lie as to Vasectomy
The defendant appealed from his conviction of rape. He had represented to his victim that he had had a vasectomy to secure consent which the court found had been vitiated.
Held: The appeal was allowed. Could a lie about fertility negate . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 13 July 2021; Ref: scu.511219

EB, Regina v: CACD 16 Oct 2006

Appeal from conviction of rape. The appellant had not disclosed that he was HIV+ (although he did not represent that he did not have HIV).
Held: The appeal succeeded. Consent was not vitiated.
[2006] EWCA Crim 2945, [2007] 1 WLR 1567
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Lawrance, Regina v CACD 23-Jul-2020
Consent not removed by Lie as to Vasectomy
The defendant appealed from his conviction of rape. He had represented to his victim that he had had a vasectomy to secure consent which the court found had been vitiated.
Held: The appeal was allowed. Could a lie about fertility negate . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 July 2021; Ref: scu.270255

G1 v Secretary of State for The Home Department (Deportation – Preliminary Issue – Refused): SIAC 24 Oct 2013

[2013] UKSIAC 96/2010)
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Begum v Special Immigration Appeals Commission and Others CA 16-Jul-2020
Return To UK to fight Citizenship Withdrawal
The appellant had, as a 15 year old, left to go to Iraq to be the ISIL terrorist group. She married an ISIL fighter and they had three children, the last one dying. Her citizenship of the UK had been withdrawn by the respondent leaving an . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 05 July 2021; Ref: scu.520732

Regina v Kenning, Blackshaw, Fenwick: CACD 24 Jun 2008

The defendants appealed against their convictions for conspiracy to aid and abet the production of drugs. They sold materials which could be used for the growing of cannabis, but exhibited a notice warning customers against this. They told undercover police however of the profits to be made.
Held: The appeal succeeded. An agreement which amounted to no more than to aid and abet an offence did not constitute a criminal conspiracy. An agreement to aid and abet an offence is not in law capable of constituting a criminal conspiracy under section 1(1) of the 1977 Act.
Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, Dobbs J, Underhill J
[2008] EWCA Crim 1534, Times 10-Jul-2008, [2008] 3 WLR 1306, [2008] 2 Cr App R 32, [2009] QB 221, [2009] Crim LR 37
Bailii
Criminal Law Act 1977 1
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Secretary of State for Social Security v Tunnicliffe CA 1991
Staughton LJ explained the presumption against interpretation of a statute to have retrospective effect: ‘the true principle is that Parliament is presumed not to have intended to alter the law applicable to past events and transactions in a manner . .
Cited – Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2) HL 10-Jul-2003
The respondent appealed against a finding that the provision which made a loan agreement completely invalid for lack of compliance with the 1974 Act was itself invalid under the Human Rights Act since it deprived the respondent of its property . .
Cited – Regina v Hollinshead CACD 1985
The defendants appealed against their convictions for conspiracy to aid an abet a fraud under the 1977 Act.
Held: The appeal succeeded. There was no offence of conspiracy in the form alleged namely to aid and abet, since aiding and abetting . .
Cited – Regina v Hollinshead; Dettlaff, Griffiths HL 2-Jan-1985
The defendants had manufactured boxes whose sole purpose would be to reverse electricity meters. The prosecutor appealed against their acquittal by the CACD on the basis that the offence of conspiracy to aid and abet did not exist, since aiding and . .
Leave to appeal – Kenning, Regina v CACD 23-Apr-2008
Appeal from convictions of possession and supply of cannabis and amphetamines. . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 June 2021; Ref: scu.270944

John Wilkes, Esq v The King: HL 1768

Mr Wilkes had been accused of making a seditious libel against the King. He had peaded not guilty, but then absconded after his conviction, but before his sentence.
[1768] EngR 2, (1768) Wilm 322, (1768) 97 ER 123
Commonlii
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Wilkes v Wood CCP 6-Dec-1763
Entry by Force was Unconstitutional
The plaintiff challenged a warrant of commitment to the Tower of London addressed to John Wilkes by name. The plaintiff sought damages after his property was entered by force on behalf of the Secretary of State.
Held: The case was decided on a . .

Cited by:
See Also – Rex v John Wilkes, Esq 7-Feb-1770
The law must be applied even if the heavens fell
An information for a misdemeanor may be amended the day before trial by a single Judge at chambers on hearing both sides and without the consent of the defendant.
On setting aside John Wilkes’ outlawry for publishing The North Briton, Lord . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 17 June 2021; Ref: scu.374591

Regina v Kelly; Regina v Lindsay: CACD 21 May 1998

Kelly was an artist allowed to draw anatomical specimens at the hospital, and Lindsay was a technician. They removed body parts from the hospital, and now appealed their convictions for theft.
Held: There is an exception to the traditional common law rule that ‘there is no property in a corpse’, namely, that once a human body or body part has undergone a process of skill by a person authorised to perform it, with the object of preserving for the purpose of medical or scientific examination or for the benefit of medical science, it becomes something quite different from an interred corpse. It thereby acquires a usefulness or value. It is capable of becoming property in the usual way, and can be stolen.’ The processes undertaken by a teaching hospital in which they preserved body parts created for them a sufficient proprietorial interest in the body parts to found a claim of theft against a defendant for removing them without their consent.
Rose LJ, Ognall J, Sullivan J
Times 21-May-1998, [1998] EWCA Crim 1578, [1997] 1 WLR 596, [1998] 3 All ER 741, [1999] QB 621, (2000) 51 BMLR 142
Bailii
Theft Act 1968 4 5
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Yearworth and others v North Bristol NHS Trust CA 4-Feb-2009
The defendant hospital had custody of sperm samples given by the claimants in the course of fertility treatment. The samples were effectively destroyed when the fridge malfunctioned. Each claimant was undergoing chemotherapy which would prevent them . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 17 June 2021; Ref: scu.87047

M, Regina v: CACD 7 Feb 2007

[2007] EWCA Crim 298, [2008] Crim LR 71
Bailii
Terrorism Act 2000
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v G; Regina v J HL 4-Mar-2009
G was to stand trial for possession of articles useful for terrorism. Whilst in prison, he collected and created diagrams and information and prepared plans to bomb a local army centre. When arrested he said he had done so to upset the prison . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 26 March 2021; Ref: scu.314316

Hayes, Regina v: CACD 21 Dec 2015

The defendant appealed from his conviction for conspiracy to defraud in connection with the alleged manipulation of the Yen LIBOR.
Held: The appeal failed: ‘the critical issue for the jury’s consideration in this case was whether they believed that the appellant may have been telling the truth when he said that his admissions of dishonesty and LIBOR manipulation in his SOCPA interviews had not been genuine admissions of guilt (and, in particular, dishonesty), but had merely been an opportunistic means of avoiding extradition to the USA. That was the critical issue on which all turned and in respect of which there was not merely the interviews but the contemporaneous recordings which substantiated those interviews. Standing back from the detail, once the objective standard of dishonesty was established as the correct test for the first limb of the Ghosh direction, it is difficult to see how the application of the subjective standard to what the appellant was saying while undertaking these trades could have led to any different conclusion.’
References: [2015] EWCA Crim 1944
Links: Bailii, Bailii
Judges: Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd CJ, Sir Brian Leveson P and Gloster LJ
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd (T/A Crockfords) SC 25-Oct-2017 (, [2017] UKSC 67, , UKSC 2016/0213, , , , , , [2018] AC 391, [2018] 1 Cr App R 12, [2017] WLR(D) 708, [2017] LLR 783, [2018] 2 All ER 406, [2017] Lloyd’s Rep FC 561, [2017] 3 WLR 1212, [2018] Crim LR 395)
    The claimant gambler sought payment of his winnings. The casino said that he had operated a system called edge-sorting to achieve the winnings, and that this was a form of cheating so as to excuse their payment. The system exploited tiny variances . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Last Update: 16 October 2020; Ref: scu.558975

Wilson, Regina v: CACD 28 Apr 2009

Appeal from whole life sentence on conviction of attempted rape, wounding with intent, and causing a person to engage in sexual activity without her consent. He had been deported from Australia after release from prison for murder and very serious sex assaults. It was conceded that he satisfied the dangerousness criteria.
Held: Taken on their own, these offences would not justify a whole life term. However, these crimes were not isolated. They were committed, shortly after his return to the community, by a man with a lengthy criminal record which included offences of the rape of, and the murder of, elderly females. The punitive element was set at 20 years with a minimum of ten years to be served.
References: [2010] 1 Cr App Rep (S) 11, [2009] Crim LR 665
Links: Bailii
Judges: Lord Judge LCJ
Statutes: Criminal Justice Act 2003 225
Jurisdiction: England and Wales

Last Update: 22 September 2020; Ref: scu.347689

Sigismund Palmer v The Queen: PC 23 Nov 1970

References: [1970] UKPC 31, [1971] 1 All ER 1077, [1971] AC 814, [1971] 2 WLR 831, (1971) 55 Cr App R 223
Links: Bailii
Coram: Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest, Lord Donovan, Lord Avonside
Ratio: Jamaica – The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder, arguing self defenec.
Held: After setting out the elements of the defence of self-defence, Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest said: ‘if the prosecution have shown that what was done was not done in self-defence then that issue is eliminated from the case. If the jury consider that the accused acted in self-defence or if the jury are in doubt as to this then they will acquit. The defence of self-defence either succeeds so as to result in an acquittal or it is disproved in which case as a defence it is rejected.’
This case cites:

  • Not Followed – The Queen v Howe ((1958) 100 CLR 448, 32 ALJR 212, [1958] ALR 753, [1958] HCA 38)
    High Court of Australia – Criminal Law – Murder – Conviction – Quashed on appeal to Supreme Court – New trial ordered – Appeal to High Court by Crown – Special leave – Questions of law affecting law of homicide – Importance – Self-defence – . .
  • Preferred – John De Freitas v The Queen ([1960] 2 WIR 523)
    (West Indian Federal Supreme Court) If the prosecution have shown that the defendant’s actions were not done in self defence, then that issue is eliminated from the case. . .

(This list may be incomplete)
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Regina v Clegg HL (Gazette 22-Feb-95, Independent 01-Feb-95, Times 25-Jan-95, Bailii, [1995] UKHL 1, [1995] 1 All ER 334, [1995] 1 AC 482)
    The defendant was a soldier on patrol in Northern Ireland. He was convicted of the murder of the passenger and attempted murder of the driver of a stolen car. He said he had fired in self defence. The Court of Appeal had rejected his appeal saying . .

(This list may be incomplete)
Jurisdiction: Commonwealth

Last Update: 30-May-17
Ref: 444511

Fagan v Metropolitan Commissioner; 31 Jul 1968

References: (1968) 52 Cr App R 700, [1969] 1 QB 439, [1968] 3 All ER 442, [1968] EWHC 1 (QB)
Links: Bailii
Coram: The LCJ, James J, Bridge J (dissenting)
Ratio: The defendant was told by a police officer to park up his car. He did so, but stopped with his wheel, trapping the officer’s foot. The magistrates were unable to decide whether the parking on the officer’s foot was deliberate, but agreed that leaving it there had been deliberate.
Held: James J described the distinction between an assault and a battery: ‘For an assault to be committed both the elements of actus reus and mens rea must be present at the same time. The ‘actus reus’ is the action causing the effect on the victim’s mind . . The ‘mens rea’ is the intention to cause that effect.’
The appeal failed. ‘On the facts found the action of the appellant may have been initially unintentional, but the time came when knowing that the wheel was on the officer’s foot the appellant (1) remained seated in the car so that his body through the medium of the car was in contact with the officer, (2) switched off the ignition of the car, (3) maintained the wheel of the car on the foot and (4) used words indicating the intention of keeping the wheel in that position. For our part, we cannot regard such conduct as mere omission or inactivity.
There was an act constituting a battery which at its inception was not criminal because there was no element of intention, but which became criminal from the moment the intention was formed to produce the apprehension which was flowing from the continuing act.’
This case cites:

  • Cited – St. George ((1840) 9 C & P 483)
    The ‘actus reus’ in an assault is the action causing the effect on the victim’s mind. . .

(This list may be incomplete)
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Regina v Ireland CACD (Times 22-May-96, Gazette 19-Jun-96, Bailii, [1996] EWCA Crim 441, [1997] QB 114)
    Silent telephone calls which resulted in psychiatric damage to the victim could constitute an ‘assault occasioning actual bodily harm’ for the purposes of section 47 of the 1861 Act. Swinton Thomas LJ: ‘The early cases pre-date the invention of the . .
  • Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Santa-Bermudez Admn (Bailii, [2003] EWHC 2908 (Admin), [2004] Crim LR 471)
    The prosecutor appealed a finding of no case to answer on an accusation of assault occasioning actual bodily harm. The victim, a police officer, was searching the pockets of an arrested person, when she was injured by a hypodermic needle. She had . .
  • Cited – Regina v Burstow, Regina v Ireland HL (Bailii, [1997] UKHL 34, [1998] 1 Cr App Rep 177, [1998] AC 147, [1997] 4 All ER 225, [1997] 3 WLR 534)
    The defendant was accused of assault occasioning actual bodily harm when he had made silent phone calls which were taken as threatening.
    Held: An assault might consist of the making of a silent telephone call in circumstances where it causes . .
  • Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Mark Thomas Ramos Admn (Bailii, [2000] EWHC Admin 328)
    . .
  • Cited – Regina v Burstow Admn (Gazette 25-Sep-96, Times 30-Jul-96, Bailii, [1996] EWHC Admin 49, [1997] 1 Cr App R 144)
    Grievous bodily harm can be inflicted by a stalker without direct physical contact and can include psychological damage. The statute could be interpreted to reflect current standards. . .

(This list may be incomplete)

Last Update: 03-Aug-16
Ref: 235710

Rex v Harris; CCR 1836

References: (1836) CCR
Ratio:The defendant bit a woman’s nose. He was accused of wounding her. The prosecution argued, using the expression unius est exclusio alterius rule that it was akin to a ‘stab, cut or wound’
Held: The defendant should be acquitted. The words suggested an intention that any injury must be inflicted by means of some weapon and this did not include the use of parts of the body.

Last Update: 23-Jul-16
Ref: 200607

Rex v Royce; CCR 1767

References: (1767) 4 Burr 2073, 98 ER 81
Ratio:The defendant was accused of riot.
Held: Involvement in a riot as a secondary party could be established by showing verbal encouragement of those physically involved at the time.

Last Update: 23-Jul-16
Ref: 272774

Rex v Pritchard; 21 Mar 1836

References: [1836] 7 C & P 303, [1836] EngR 540, (1836) 7 Car & P 303, (1836) 173 ER 135
Links: Commonlii
Coram: Alderson B
Ratio:A person, deaf and dumb, was to be tried for a capital felony the Judge ordered a Jury to be impanneled, to try whether he was mute by the visitation of God, the jury found that he was so. The jury were then sworn to try whether he was able to plead, which they found in the affirmative, and the prisoner, by a sign, pleaded Not guilty The Judge then ordered the jury to be sworn to try whether the prisoner was ‘now sane or not’; and on this question, his Lordship directed the jury to consider whether the prisoner had sufficieut intellect to comprehend the course of the proceedings, so as to make a proper defence, to challenge any juror he might wish to object to, and to comprehend the details of the evldence, and that if they thought he had not, they should find him not of sane mind. The jury did so, and the Judge ordered the prisoner to be detained.
The court stated the test for whether a defendant was fit to plead. Alderson B said: ‘There are three points to be enquired into:- first, whether the prisoner is mute of malice or not; secondly, whether he can plead to the indictment or not; thirdly, whether he is of sufficient intellect to comprehend the course of the proceedings in the trial so as to make a proper defence – to know that he might challenge any of you [the jury] to whom he may object – and to comprehend the details of the evidence, which in a case of this nature must constitute a minute investigation.”
This case cites:

  • Mentioned – Rex v Dyson (Unreported, 1831)
    Parke J empanelled a jury to decide whether the defendant was fit to plead. In directing the jury the judge referred to the following passage in Hale’s Pleas of the Crown, vol I, p 34: ‘If a man in his sound memory commits a capital offence, and . .

(This list may be incomplete)
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Crown Prosecution Service v P; Director of Public Prosecutions v P Admn (Bailii, [2007] EWHC 946 (Admin), [2007] 4 All ER 628, [2008] 1 WLR 1005)
    The prosecutor appealed a grant of a stay of a prosecution of the 13 year old defendant as an abuse of process. Reports had indicated that he was unfit to plead. The prosecution contended that, if the court thought P ought not to face trial by . .
  • Cited – Taitt v The State PC (Bailii, [2012] UKPC 38)
    (Trinidad & Tobago) The defendant sought leave to appeal against his conviction for murder, with the death penalty mandatory sentence. He was of severely low intelligence.
    Held: The appeal against conviction would not be allowed. Settled law . .
  • Confirmed – Regina v Robertson CACD ((1968) 52 Cr App R 690, [1968] 3 All ER 557, [1968] 1 WLR 1767)
    The evidence suggested that the defendant had a complete understanding of the legal proceedings in which he was involved but, also that, through mental illness, he had suffered delusions which may have effected his ability ‘properly’ to conduct his . .
  • Cited – Regina v Berry CACD ([1978] 66 Cr App R 156)
    Although a person was highly abnormal, it did not mean that he was incapable of doing those things set out in Pritchard as the requirements to be fit to be tried. Lord Lane CJ set aside a finding that the defendant was unfit to stand trial, saying: . .
  • Explained – John M, Regina v CACD (Bailii, [2003] EWCA Crim 3452, [2004] MHLR 86)
    The trial judge had directed the jury, determining fitness to plead, with an extended formulation of the test, including the appellant’s ability to give evidence, if he wished, in his own defence. This facility had been described to mean that ‘the . .
  • Cited – Brown v The Queen PC (Bailii, [2016] UKPC 6, Privy Council Appeal No 0104 of 2014)
    Court of Appeal of Jamaica – Appeal against conviction for murder – challenge as to capacity to plead.
    Held: The appeal against conviction failed, but the appeal against sentence succeeded. . .
  • Cited – Lumsdon and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Legal Services Board SC (Bailii, [2015] UKSC 40, [2015] Crim LR 894, [2015] WLR(D) 270, [2015] 3 CMLR 42, [2015] HRLR 12, [2015] 3 WLR 121, [2016] 1 All ER 391, WLRD, Bailii Summary, UKSC 2014/0081, SC, SC Summary, SC Video)
    The appellant challenged the respondent’s approval of alterations to their regulatory arrangements, under Part 3 of Schedule 4 to the 2007 Act. The alterations gave effect to the Quality Assurance Scheme for Advocates providing for the assessment of . .
  • Cited – Orr, Regina v CACD (Bailii, [2016] EWCA Crim 889, [2016] WLR(D) 378, WLRD)
    The court considered whether the trial court had correctly identified the test for fitness to plead.
    Held: The appeal was allowed: ‘Once the issue of fitness to plead has been raised it must be determined. In this case, the judge explicitly . .

(This list may be incomplete)

Last Update: 21-Jul-16
Ref: 251549