Booth & Anor v R.
The Supreme Court's test for dishonesty in Ivey is binding and must be applied in criminal cases; the judge's directions were sufficient; there was ample evidence for all counts; the sentence was manifestly excessive and reduced to 17 years.
- Parties
- Appellant: David Barton; Applicant/appellant: Rosemary Booth; Respondent: The Queen
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 29 April 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
- Outcome
- Appeals against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence allowed in part.
- Legal Topics
- Dishonesty, Conspiracy to Defraud, Theft, Fraud, False Accounting, Money Laundering, Capacity, Precedent, Sentencing
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
David Barton
Appellant
Rosemary Booth
Applicant/appellant
The Queen
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the correct test for dishonesty is that articulated in Ivey v Genting Casinos or R v Ghosh
- 2 Whether the judge erred in directions to the jury on dishonesty
- 3 Whether the judge erred in his approach to conspiracy to defraud
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court's test for dishonesty in Ivey is binding and must be applied in criminal cases; the judge's directions were sufficient; there was ample evidence for all counts; the sentence was manifestly excessive and reduced to 17 years.
Court Disposition
Appeals against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence allowed in part.
Orders
- Leave to appeal against conviction granted to Rosemary Booth.
- Leave to appeal against sentence granted to David Barton.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment