Yip, R. [2010] EWCA Crim 1381 (26 May 2010)

Yip, R. [2010] EWCA Crim 1381 (26 May 2010)

The convictions on Counts 6 and 7 were unsafe due to misdirection on the law of 'cheating the revenue', lack of evidence of specific criminal conduct, and failure to direct the jury on the effect of acquittals on related counts; thus, the verdicts must be quashed.

Citation
[2010] EWCA Crim 1381
Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Albert Yip
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 May 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal allowed; convictions quashed
Legal Topics
Proceeds of Crime, Money Laundering, Cheating the Revenue, Criminal Property, Jury Directions, Unsafe Conviction
Criminal Law Proceeds of Crime Money Laundering Cheating the Revenue Criminal Property Jury Directions Unsafe Conviction

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 12
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Albert Yip

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conviction on Counts 6 and 7 for acquiring and removing criminal property was safe
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in directing the jury on the law regarding 'cheating the revenue'
  3. 3 Whether the jury was properly directed regarding the acquittal on related counts and its impact on the remaining counts

Ratio Decidendi

The convictions on Counts 6 and 7 were unsafe due to misdirection on the law of 'cheating the revenue', lack of evidence of specific criminal conduct, and failure to direct the jury on the effect of acquittals on related counts; thus, the verdicts must be quashed.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; convictions quashed

Orders

  • Verdicts on Counts 6 and 7 quashed