Whatcott, R. v

Whatcott, R. v

The judge was correct to determine as a matter of law that the late payment fees were penalties and thus unenforceable; the representations made by the appellant were untrue as a result, and the jury properly considered dishonesty and knowledge. The appeal against conviction is dismissed.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: Christopher Whatcott
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 October 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Fraud, Unfair Commercial Practices, Penalty Clauses, Burden of Proof, Contractual Enforceability
Criminal Law Consumer Protection Contract Law Fraud Unfair Commercial Practices Penalty Clauses Burden of Proof Contractual Enforceability

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Christopher Whatcott

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge erred in ruling that the issue of penalty charges was a matter of law
  2. 2 Whether the judge applied the correct standard of proof to the issue of untrue representations
  3. 3 Whether the contractual terms were unenforceable as penalty charges or unfair contractual terms

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was correct to determine as a matter of law that the late payment fees were penalties and thus unenforceable; the representations made by the appellant were untrue as a result, and the jury properly considered dishonesty and knowledge. The appeal against conviction is dismissed.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • representation order granted to Mr S Parham