Lunn, R v

Lunn, R v

The indictment was not duplicitous and properly alleged a course of conduct; the judge's trial management and directions were fair and adequate; the sentence was appropriately based on the overall harm and culpability, not limited to three transactions; there was no error in conviction or sentence.

Parties
Respondent: The Queen; Appellant: Christopher Lunn
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Cheating the Revenue, Indictment Particularity, Duplicity, Sentencing Guidelines, Trial Management, Dishonesty, Loss to Revenue
Criminal Law Tax Law Cheating the Revenue Indictment Particularity Duplicity Sentencing Guidelines Trial Management Dishonesty +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen

Respondent

Christopher Lunn

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the indictment was duplicitous or lacked sufficient particularity
  2. 2 Whether the trial process was unfair due to the number of transactions and period covered
  3. 3 Whether the judge's directions on knowledge, participation, and loss were adequate

Ratio Decidendi

The indictment was not duplicitous and properly alleged a course of conduct; the judge's trial management and directions were fair and adequate; the sentence was appropriately based on the overall harm and culpability, not limited to three transactions; there was no error in conviction or sentence.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Conviction on counts 1-4 upheld
  • Sentence of 5 years' imprisonment upheld