Majeed v R.

Majeed v R.

The actions of the cricketers were directly related to the affairs of their employers, falling squarely within the ambit of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1906. The criminal conduct prohibited by s.42 of the Gambling Act 2005 occurred within the jurisdiction, making prosecution proper.

Parties
Appellant: Majeed; Respondent: R; Appellant: Westfield
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Corruption, Bribery, Cheating at Gambling, Jurisdiction, Contractual Obligations
Criminal Law Corruption Bribery Cheating at Gambling Jurisdiction Contractual Obligations

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Majeed

Appellant

R

Respondent

Westfield

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether actions of cricketers constituted offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act 1906 and Gambling Act 2005
  2. 2 Whether the offences were committed in relation to the affairs of their employer
  3. 3 Jurisdictional applicability of Gambling Act 2005

Ratio Decidendi

The actions of the cricketers were directly related to the affairs of their employers, falling squarely within the ambit of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1906. The criminal conduct prohibited by s.42 of the Gambling Act 2005 occurred within the jurisdiction, making prosecution proper.

Court Disposition

appeals dismissed

Orders

  • convictions upheld
  • no retrial ordered