O & H, R v

O & H, R v

A jury is entitled to conclude, without direct evidence of accounting practices, that a mortgage or loan application to a commercial institution is a document required for an accounting purpose under section 17(1)(b) of the Theft Act 1968, as successful applications lead to the opening of an account in the lender's books.

Parties
Appellant: The Queen; Respondent: O; Respondent: H
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 October 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Terminating Ruling (no Case to Answer)
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
False Accounting, Furnishing False Information, Mortgage Fraud, Proceeds of Crime Act Offences
Criminal Law False Accounting Furnishing False Information Mortgage Fraud Proceeds of Crime Act Offences

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 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen

Appellant

O

Respondent

H

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Terminating Ruling (no Case to Answer)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether mortgage application forms are documents required for an accounting purpose under section 17(1)(b) of the Theft Act 1968
  2. 2 Whether direct evidence of accounting practices is necessary to prove a document is required for an accounting purpose

Ratio Decidendi

A jury is entitled to conclude, without direct evidence of accounting practices, that a mortgage or loan application to a commercial institution is a document required for an accounting purpose under section 17(1)(b) of the Theft Act 1968, as successful applications lead to the opening of an account in the lender's books.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Ruling of no case to answer set aside
  • Case remitted for further proceedings