F & B, R v [2009] EWCA Crim 1961 (4 September 2009)

F & B, R v [2009] EWCA Crim 1961 (4 September 2009)

The trial judge's decision to refuse a stay for abuse of process was within the proper range of discretion, as a fair trial remained possible despite the delay; the offence of conspiracy to defraud is sufficiently certain in law and does not infringe Articles 5 or 7 ECHR where dishonest means are specified; evidence relating to the acquitted co-defendant is admissible as there is no issue estoppel or double jeopardy; and the documents from Nicholas Fraser are admissible under s.117 CJA 2003 as business documents, with no sufficient reason to doubt their reliability.

Citation
[2009] EWCA Crim 1961
Parties
Applicant: F; Applicant: B; Respondent: Crown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 September 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Interlocutory Application for Leave to Appeal Against Preliminary Rulings Under S.9(11) Criminal Justice Act 1987
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused on all grounds.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Delay in Criminal Proceedings, Legal Certainty, Conspiracy to Defraud, Admissibility of Evidence, Article 6 ECHR, Article 7 ECHR
Criminal Law Human Rights Law Evidence Abuse of Process Delay in Criminal Proceedings Legal Certainty Conspiracy to Defraud Admissibility of Evidence +2 more

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 4 Authorities cited 27 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

F

Applicant

B

Applicant

Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Interlocutory Application for Leave to Appeal Against Preliminary Rulings Under S.9(11) Criminal Justice Act 1987

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the retrial should be stayed as an abuse of process due to delay
  2. 2 Whether the common law offence of conspiracy to defraud is too vague to satisfy Articles 5 and 7 ECHR
  3. 3 Whether evidence inconsistent with the acquittal of a co-defendant is admissible at retrial

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge's decision to refuse a stay for abuse of process was within the proper range of discretion, as a fair trial remained possible despite the delay; the offence of conspiracy to defraud is sufficiently certain in law and does not infringe Articles 5 or 7 ECHR where dishonest means are specified; evidence relating to the acquitted co-defendant is admissible as there is no issue estoppel or double jeopardy; and the documents from Nicholas Fraser are admissible under s.117 CJA 2003 as business documents, with no sufficient reason to doubt their reliability.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused on all grounds.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal against the refusal to stay proceedings for abuse of process is refused.
  • Leave to appeal on the ground of lack of certainty in the offence is refused.