Arowolo v Department for Work and Pensions
The magistrates were entitled to admit secondary evidence of the application form after finding the original could not be found and a reasonable explanation was given. The evidence, including the interview, was sufficient to prove the appellant knowingly failed to disclose the accounts. The best evidence rule did not require more, and hearsay was admissible by agreement.
- Parties
- Claimant: Arowolo; Defendant: Department for Work and Pensions
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 30 April 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal (case Stated) / Judgment on Appeal
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Best Evidence Rule, Admissibility of Secondary Evidence, Hearsay, Social Security Fraud
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Arowolo
Claimant
Department for Work and Pensions
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (case Stated) / Judgment on Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the magistrates were entitled to convict without the original job seekers allowance application form
- 2 Whether secondary evidence of the form's contents was admissible
- 3 Whether a sufficient search for the original form was conducted
Ratio Decidendi
The magistrates were entitled to admit secondary evidence of the application form after finding the original could not be found and a reasonable explanation was given. The evidence, including the interview, was sufficient to prove the appellant knowingly failed to disclose the accounts. The best evidence rule did not require more, and hearsay was admissible by agreement.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Detailed assessment of the claimant's publicly funded costs
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