Norman, R v

Norman, R v

The appellant's course of conduct in applying released funds for an unauthorised purpose (payment of school fees) after obtaining a variation of a restraint order constituted acts tending and intended to pervert the course of public justice. Such conduct, even if it amounts only to a breach of the restraint order, is capable of amounting to the offence. The particulars of the indictment properly alleged a course of conduct, and the jury was entitled to convict. There was no abuse of process in charging the offence.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: Carole Denise Norman
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 July 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Perverting the Course of Justice, Money Laundering, Breach of Restraint Order, Proceeds of Crime Act
Criminal Law Perverting the Course of Justice Money Laundering Breach of Restraint Order Proceeds of Crime Act

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Carole Denise Norman

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether failures to act can constitute the offence of doing acts tending and intended to pervert the course of public justice
  2. 2 Whether a breach of a restraint order under POCA, without more, can amount to perverting the course of justice
  3. 3 Whether the particulars of the indictment properly alleged a course of conduct amounting to the offence

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant's course of conduct in applying released funds for an unauthorised purpose (payment of school fees) after obtaining a variation of a restraint order constituted acts tending and intended to pervert the course of public justice. Such conduct, even if it amounts only to a breach of the restraint order, is capable of amounting to the offence. The particulars of the indictment properly alleged a course of conduct, and the jury was entitled to convict. There was no abuse of process in charging the offence.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed