Biffa Waste Services Ltd v R.

Biffa Waste Services Ltd v R.

The judge was correct to exclude evidence relating to Chinese standards and post-export recycling processes, as the legal test is applied at the point of export and is not dependent on the standards or processes in the destination country. The judge was also correct to admit evidence of previous convictions to correct a false impression, and did so in a manner that avoided unfair prejudice. The convictions are safe.

Parties
Appellant: Biffa Waste Services Limited; Respondent: The Queen
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction After Trial and Sentencing
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; convictions upheld
Legal Topics
Transfrontier Shipment of Waste, Export of Household Waste, Strict Liability Offences, Admissibility of Evidence, Bad Character Evidence
Environmental Law Criminal Law Transfrontier Shipment of Waste Export of Household Waste Strict Liability Offences Admissibility of Evidence Bad Character Evidence

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Biffa Waste Services Limited

Appellant

The Queen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction After Trial and Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in excluding evidence regarding compliance with Chinese standards and environmental soundness of recycling in China
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in admitting evidence of the appellant's previous convictions to correct an alleged false impression

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was correct to exclude evidence relating to Chinese standards and post-export recycling processes, as the legal test is applied at the point of export and is not dependent on the standards or processes in the destination country. The judge was also correct to admit evidence of previous convictions to correct a false impression, and did so in a manner that avoided unfair prejudice. The convictions are safe.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; convictions upheld

Orders

  • Convictions stand
  • No change to sentence or orders