Hamidi & Anor, R. v

Hamidi & Anor, R. v

The directions on adverse inference were correct and not unfair; the Med Trading evidence was properly admitted and could be used as evidence of propensity; the summing up was not unfair or unbalanced; and the sentence imposed was not manifestly excessive or disparate.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Khaled Hamidi; Appellant: Babak Cherazi
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 February 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeals against conviction and sentence dismissed
Legal Topics
Conspiracy to Cheat the Revenue, Value Added Tax (vat) Fraud, Admissibility of Bad Character Evidence, Adverse Inference From Silence, Fairness of Summing Up, Sentencing
Criminal Law Revenue Law Conspiracy to Cheat the Revenue Value Added Tax (vat) Fraud Admissibility of Bad Character Evidence Adverse Inference From Silence Fairness of Summing Up Sentencing

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Khaled Hamidi

Appellant

Babak Cherazi

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in permitting the jury to draw adverse inferences under section 35(2) Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 against the appellants but not a co-accused who absconded
  2. 2 Whether the admission and use of evidence relating to Hamidi's previous involvement in Med Trading Limited was proper, including as evidence of propensity
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge's summing up was unfair or amounted to advocacy against Cherazi

Ratio Decidendi

The directions on adverse inference were correct and not unfair; the Med Trading evidence was properly admitted and could be used as evidence of propensity; the summing up was not unfair or unbalanced; and the sentence imposed was not manifestly excessive or disparate.

Court Disposition

Appeals against conviction and sentence dismissed