Clark & Anor v R [2012] EWCA Crim 1220 (01 June 2012)

Clark & Anor v R [2012] EWCA Crim 1220 (01 June 2012)

There was sufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to infer that Julie Clark knowingly participated in the conspiracies to defraud mortgage lenders, and the judge was entitled to leave counts 14 and 15 to the jury. The conviction for count 16 was dependent on counts 14 and 15 and was therefore safe. The verdicts...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2012] EWCA Crim 1220
Parties
Appellant: Stephen Clark; Appellant: Julie Clark; Respondent: R
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 June 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Conspiracy to Defraud, Attempting to Convert Criminal Property, Mortgage Fraud, Money Laundering
Criminal Law Conspiracy to Defraud Attempting to Convert Criminal Property Mortgage Fraud Money Laundering

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 14
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen Clark

Appellant

Julie Clark

Appellant

R

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was sufficient evidence to leave counts 14 and 15 (conspiracy to defraud) to the jury
  2. 2 Whether the conviction for count 16 (attempting to convert criminal property) could stand if counts 14 and 15 failed
  3. 3 Whether inconsistent verdicts were returned against Stephen Clark

Ratio Decidendi

There was sufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to infer that Julie Clark knowingly participated in the conspiracies to defraud mortgage lenders, and the judge was entitled to leave counts 14 and 15 to the jury. The conviction for count 16 was dependent on counts 14 and 15 and was therefore safe. The verdicts against Stephen Clark were not logically inconsistent.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed