Evans & Ors, R, v [2014] EW Misc 5 (CrownC) (18 February 2014)

Evans & Ors, R, v [2014] EW Misc 5 (CrownC) (18 February 2014)

The court held that, even assuming dishonesty, the evidence as presented by the Crown does not establish the legal elements of conspiracy to defraud against the defendants, as the rights and interests of the Mineral Planning Authorities and Coal Authority were not sufficiently prejudiced in law to sustain the charge; therefore, the charge must be dismissed.

Citation
[2014] EW Misc 5 (CrownC)
Parties
Prosecution: R (The Crown); Defendant: Eric Evans; Defendant: David Alan Whiteley; Defendant: Frances Bodman; Defendant: Stephen Davies; Defendant: Richard Walters; Defendant: Leighton Humphreys
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 February 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Application to Dismiss Prior to Arraignment
Outcome
charge dismissed
Legal Topics
Conspiracy to Defraud, Fraud, Common Law Offences, Statutory Interpretation, Planning Law, Coal Mining Regulation
Criminal Law Conspiracy to Defraud Fraud Common Law Offences Statutory Interpretation Planning Law Coal Mining Regulation

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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 15
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R (The Crown)

Prosecution

Eric Evans

Defendant

David Alan Whiteley

Defendant

Frances Bodman

Defendant

Stephen Davies

Defendant

Richard Walters

Defendant

Leighton Humphreys

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Application to Dismiss Prior to Arraignment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Scope and elements of conspiracy to defraud under common law
  2. 2 Whether evidence is sufficient for conviction
  3. 3 Nature of proprietary and statutory rights of public authorities

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that, even assuming dishonesty, the evidence as presented by the Crown does not establish the legal elements of conspiracy to defraud against the defendants, as the rights and interests of the Mineral Planning Authorities and Coal Authority were not sufficiently prejudiced in law to sustain the charge; therefore, the charge must be dismissed.

Court Disposition

charge dismissed

Orders

  • The charge of conspiracy to defraud against all defendants is dismissed.