REGINA v Peter HUNTER

REGINA v Peter HUNTER

The convictions were safe as the appellants knowingly carried on a business for a fraudulent purpose by systematically deceiving ticket vendors and consumers, breaching statutory duties, and failing to warn of risks; the statutory offence under section 993 Companies Act 2006 is not limited by common law conspiracy...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Peter Hunter; Appellant: David Thomas Smith
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 November 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Fraudulent Trading, Fraud, Ticket Touting, Dishonesty, Admissibility of Evidence, Fairness of Contract Terms, Consumer Rights Act 2015, Statutory Interpretation, Ratio Decidendi, Obiter Dicta
Criminal Law Company Law Consumer Protection Fraudulent Trading Fraud Ticket Touting Dishonesty Admissibility of Evidence +5 more

Source-derived case record

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 5 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Peter Hunter

Appellant

David Thomas Smith

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether convictions for fraudulent trading and possession of articles for use in fraud were safe
  2. 2 Application of section 993 Companies Act 2006 and section 6 Fraud Act 2006
  3. 3 Admissibility of fresh evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The convictions were safe as the appellants knowingly carried on a business for a fraudulent purpose by systematically deceiving ticket vendors and consumers, breaching statutory duties, and failing to warn of risks; the statutory offence under section 993 Companies Act 2006 is not limited by common law conspiracy to defraud; fairness of ticket restrictions under Consumer Rights Act 2015 was properly determined by the judge; tickets are contractual licences and restrictions transfer; fresh evidence was not admissible; judge's directions were proper.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Convictions upheld for fraudulent trading and possession of articles for use in fraud
  • Application to adduce fresh evidence dismissed