Balogun & Anor, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 845 (13 June 2024)

Bolaji's sentence was upheld as appropriate given his leading role, high culpability, and the scale of harm. Balogun's sentence was reduced to 18 months' imprisonment, reflecting his medium culpability, direct harm, and significant family mitigation, but immediate custody remained necessary due to the seriousness...

Source-derived case information.

Citation: [2024] EWCA Crim 845
Parties: Prosecution: Rex; Appellant: Taofeeq Balogun; Applicant: Oluwadamilola Bolaji
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 13 June 2024
Procedural Posture: Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Sentence
Outcome: Bolaji's renewed application for leave to appeal refused; Balogun's appeal allowed in part.
Legal Topics: Conspiracy to Defraud, Sentencing, Appeal Against Sentence, Fraud by False Representation

Criminal Law Conspiracy to Defraud Sentencing Appeal Against Sentence Fraud by False Representation

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 7

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

Taofeeq Balogun

Appellant

Oluwadamilola Bolaji

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Sentence

Legal Issues

1 Whether the sentences imposed on Taofeeq Balogun and Oluwadamilola Bolaji were manifestly excessive or wrong in principle
2 Whether the sentence for Balogun should be suspended

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Bolaji's renewed application for leave to appeal refused; Balogun's appeal allowed in part.

Orders

Bolaji's application for leave to appeal and representation order refused.
Balogun's sentence of 3 years' imprisonment quashed and substituted with 18 months' imprisonment, to be served immediately.

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.