Search for: "S. R. V."
Results 21 - 40
of 124,381
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Dec 2008, 10:27 am
R v A [2008] EWCA Crim 2908; [2008] WLR (D) 374 “The expression ‘new and compelling evidence … in relation to the qualifying offence’ in s 78(1) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 was not restricted to further evidence either from an individual who suggested that the defendant had admitted after the trial that he was [...] [read post]
3 Aug 2010, 4:28 am
R v Rochford; [2010] WLR (D) 220 “A failure by a defendant to comply with the requirements of ss 5(5) and 6A of the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 to provide a defence statement containing the general nature of his defence, did not constitute a contempt of court and was only punishable with sanctions specified in s 11 of the 1996 Act, of a court or other party being permitted to make comment on that failure, or the court or jury being permitted to… [read post]
7 Jan 2016, 2:41 am
The joint session of the Supreme Court and Privy Council heard the appeals in R v Jogee and Ruddock v The Queen (Jamaica) between the 27 and 29 October 2015. [read post]
25 Jun 2014, 2:13 am
For judgment, please download: [2014] UKSC 38 For Court’s press summary, please download: Court’s Press Summary For a non-PDF version of the judgment, please visit: BAILII The post New Judgment: R (Nicklinson & Anor) v Ministry of Justice; R (AM) v DPP [2014] UKSC 38 appeared first on UKSCBlog. [read post]
3 Aug 2009, 2:41 am
R v C [2009] UKHL 42; [2009] WLR (D) 272 “The words of s 30(2)(a) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 ‘or for any other reason’ were wide enough to include an irrational fear preventing the free exercise of choice, and inability to communicate the choice made within s 30(2)(b) was not limited to physical inability. [read post]
11 Jun 2009, 1:31 am
R v Fazal [2009] WLR (D) 175 “A defendant who allowed another person to lodge, receive, retain or withdraw money which amounted to criminal property from the defendant's bank account, was to be regarded as having converted that property for the purposes of s 327(1)(c) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. [read post]
23 Oct 2009, 3:35 am
R v Ghulam; [2009] WLR (D) 303 “The word ‘determination’ in s 4(6) of the Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 refers only to a determination that a defendant is unfit to plead so that, where that provision's requirement for evidence from two or more registered medical practitioners to be before the court has not been met, [...] [read post]
3 Aug 2010, 4:23 am
R v Ahmed; [2010] WLR (D) 219 “The act of procuring the miscarriage of a woman’s child did not, by itself, amount to an offence known to English law. [read post]
27 May 2010, 11:16 am
Unlike R. v. [read post]
26 Apr 2010, 3:18 am
R v Modjiri [2010] EWCA Crim 829; [2010] WLR (D) 99 “The concern of s 79(3) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 is limited to the valuation of property and does not extend to the realisation of property, so that it does not have to be assumed that a beneficial interest in property has to be sold separately from the property and, for the purposes of making a confiscation order, the correct basis on which to proceed is to take into account the due proportion of the… [read post]
29 Jun 2007, 2:33 am
R v. [read post]
23 Jul 2018, 1:40 pm
In R. v. [read post]
17 Jan 2012, 3:27 pm
DISMISSED – Production and Possession of Marijuana for Sale, State v. [read post]
12 Mar 2009, 3:32 am
R v Seddon; [2009] WLR (D) 88 “In a European arrest warrant which sought a defendant's return to this jurisdiction as a convicted person for the extradition offence of blackmail an allegation that the defendant was unlawfully at large and in breach of bail did not amount to ‘an offence disclosed by the information provided … [...] [read post]
20 Jun 2007, 2:00 am
R v. [read post]
4 Aug 2016, 1:35 am
The Supreme Court heard the appeal in R v Golds on 14 June 2016, concerning the defence of diminished responsibility where a murder charge was at issue. [read post]
5 Mar 2018, 11:24 am
R v Jordan has had a huge impact upon criminal prosecutions, particularly those that had at the time of the decision’s release already been languishing in the system. [read post]
24 Aug 2015, 1:30 am
The court further held that the trial judge had not been wrong to dismiss the appellant’s submission on non-prosecution assurances and had correctly applied the test in R v Abu Hamza [2007] QB 659. [read post]
18 Aug 2008, 8:41 am
R v K [2008] EWCA Crim 1900; [2008] WLR (D) 294 “A person called to the Bar who had not found a place in chambers but fell within para 206.1 of the Code of Conduct was not thereby ‘authorised’ by the Bar Council to practise as a member of the profession whose members the Bar Council regulated for purposes of s 84 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999; accordingly he was apt to be prosecuted for providing immigration advice or immigration… [read post]
29 May 2007, 2:34 am
R v. [read post]
