Cooper, R v [2010] EWCA Crim 979 (05 May 2010)

Cooper, R v [2010] EWCA Crim 979 (05 May 2010)

The conviction was quashed because the only evidence of falsity came from Mr. Thomas and business records he prepared; both were not independent sources, contravening section 13 of the Perjury Act 1911, which requires corroboration from an independent source.

Citation
[2010] EWCA Crim 979
Parties
Prosecution: R; Appellant: John Cooper
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 May 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
conviction quashed
Legal Topics
Perjury, Corroboration, Evidence, Business Records
Criminal Law Perjury Corroboration Evidence Business Records

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R

Prosecution

John Cooper

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a conviction for perjury can be sustained solely on the evidence of one witness and business records prepared by that same witness under section 13 of the Perjury Act 1911.

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction was quashed because the only evidence of falsity came from Mr. Thomas and business records he prepared; both were not independent sources, contravening section 13 of the Perjury Act 1911, which requires corroboration from an independent source.

Court Disposition

conviction quashed

Orders

  • Conviction for perjury quashed.