Binfield, R v

Binfield, R v

The VAT 4 certificate admitted as fresh evidence was generated post-deregistration, contained no relevant data regarding the VAT return period, and did not undermine the prosecution case or render the conviction unsafe; there was no material non-disclosure or suppression by the Crown.

Parties
Respondent: R; Appellant: Robert Frederick Binfield
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 October 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Fraudulent Evasion of VAT, Disclosure of Evidence, Fresh Evidence on Appeal
Criminal Law Tax Law Fraudulent Evasion of VAT Disclosure of Evidence Fresh Evidence on Appeal

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R

Respondent

Robert Frederick Binfield

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conviction was unsafe due to non-disclosure of a VAT 4 certificate
  2. 2 Whether the VAT 4 certificate undermined the prosecution case regarding the due date for VAT return
  3. 3 Whether the manner of non-disclosure affected the accuracy and completeness of digital records relied upon by the Crown

Ratio Decidendi

The VAT 4 certificate admitted as fresh evidence was generated post-deregistration, contained no relevant data regarding the VAT return period, and did not undermine the prosecution case or render the conviction unsafe; there was no material non-disclosure or suppression by the Crown.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Fresh evidence admitted under section 23 Criminal Appeal Act 1968
  • Conviction upheld