North, R v [2001] EWCA Crim 544 (9th March, 2001)

North, R v [2001] EWCA Crim 544 (9th March, 2001)

Section 17(2) Firearms Act 1968 is satisfied by the defendant having possession in the sense of custody or control, as established in Sullivan v. Earl of Caithness, and does not require the Crown to prove that the defendant had the firearm physically with him at the time of committing or being arrested for a...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Crim 544
Parties
Appellant: Christopher North; Respondent: R (Crown)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Point of Law
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Firearms Offences, Statutory Interpretation, Possession Vs. Having With Him, Firearms Act 1968 S.17(2)
Criminal Law Firearms Offences Statutory Interpretation Possession Vs. Having With Him Firearms Act 1968 S.17(2)

Source-derived case record

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 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Christopher North

Appellant

R (Crown)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Point of Law

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether 'has in his possession' in s.17(2) Firearms Act 1968 requires physical possession or includes broader custody/control
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in law by not confining s.17(2) to physical possession at time of arrest

Ratio Decidendi

Section 17(2) Firearms Act 1968 is satisfied by the defendant having possession in the sense of custody or control, as established in Sullivan v. Earl of Caithness, and does not require the Crown to prove that the defendant had the firearm physically with him at the time of committing or being arrested for a Schedule 1 offence.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed