Gill & Anor, R. v

Gill & Anor, R. v

Code C of PACE applied to the Hansard interview and a caution should have been administered, but the breach was not caused by bad faith and did not have such an adverse effect on the fairness of the proceedings as to warrant exclusion of the evidence. The judge adequately directed the jury on domicile, cheat, and...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Sewa Singh Gill; Appellant: Paramjit Singh Gill
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 July 2003
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; renewed application for leave refused.
Legal Topics
Cheating the Revenue, Domicile, Admissibility of Evidence, Police and Criminal Evidence Act, Hansard Interview, Burden of Proof, Fraudulent Conduct
Criminal Law Tax Law Cheating the Revenue Domicile Admissibility of Evidence Police and Criminal Evidence Act Hansard Interview Burden of Proof +1 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 4 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Sewa Singh Gill

Appellant

Paramjit Singh Gill

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether evidence from Hansard interview should be excluded under section 78 of PACE
  2. 2 Whether Code C of PACE applied to the Hansard interview
  3. 3 Whether the judge misdirected the jury on the issue of domicile

Ratio Decidendi

Code C of PACE applied to the Hansard interview and a caution should have been administered, but the breach was not caused by bad faith and did not have such an adverse effect on the fairness of the proceedings as to warrant exclusion of the evidence. The judge adequately directed the jury on domicile, cheat, and the issues for each count. The convictions were safe.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; renewed application for leave refused.

Orders

  • Convictions upheld
  • No further leave to appeal granted