Clark & Anor v R

Clark & Anor v R

There was sufficient evidence from which a reasonable jury could infer that Julie Clark was a knowing party to the conspiracies to defraud and to the attempt to convert criminal property. The trial judge was correct to leave the case to the jury, and the convictions are safe.

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, No Case to Answer Submission
Criminal Law Conspiracy to Defraud Attempting to Convert Criminal Property Mortgage Fraud Money Laundering No Case to Answer Submission

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
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 the trial judge erred in rejecting the submission of no case to answer for counts 14 and 15
  2. 2 Whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain convictions for conspiracy to defraud and attempting to convert criminal property
  3. 3 Whether the verdicts were inconsistent

Ratio Decidendi

There was sufficient evidence from which a reasonable jury could infer that Julie Clark was a knowing party to the conspiracies to defraud and to the attempt to convert criminal property. The trial judge was correct to leave the case to the jury, and the convictions are safe.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed