Chilvers, R. v (Rev1) [2021] EWCA Crim 1311 (27 August 2021)

Chilvers, R. v (Rev1) [2021] EWCA Crim 1311 (27 August 2021)

The conviction is not unsafe. The judge's directions required the jury to be sure that the defendant engaged repeatedly or continuously in controlling or coercive behaviour, which is the essential ingredient of the offence under section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015. The particulars in count 1 were examples of such behaviour, not alternative ingredients. The law does not require unanimity on each particular unless they are truly alternative bases for conviction. The directions given were sufficient and there was no need for a Brown direction in this case.

Citation
[2021] EWCA Crim 1311
Parties
Appellant: Peter Chilvers; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 August 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Application for extension of time and leave to appeal against conviction refused.
Legal Topics
Controlling or Coercive Behaviour, Jury Directions, Unanimity of Verdict, Serious Crime Act 2015 S.76, Brown Direction
Criminal Law Controlling or Coercive Behaviour Jury Directions Unanimity of Verdict Serious Crime Act 2015 S.76 Brown Direction

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Chilvers

Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conviction for controlling or coercive behaviour is unsafe due to the absence of a Brown direction in the jury summing up.

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction is not unsafe. The judge's directions required the jury to be sure that the defendant engaged repeatedly or continuously in controlling or coercive behaviour, which is the essential ingredient of the offence under section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015. The particulars in count 1 were examples of such behaviour, not alternative ingredients. The law does not require unanimity on each particular unless they are truly alternative bases for conviction. The directions given were sufficient and there was no need for a Brown direction in this case.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time and leave to appeal against conviction refused.