Bewley v R

Bewley v R

The starting pistol did not fall within the definition of a firearm under s.57(1) of the Firearms Act 1968 because it could only discharge a missile with the use of external tools and elaborate steps, amounting to conversion. The proper statutory approach after the Firearms Act 1982 is to consider whether the item...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: William Bewley; Respondent: The Crown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 July 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal allowed; conviction quashed; sentence reduced
Legal Topics
Firearms, Imitation Firearms, Statutory Interpretation, Possession of Prohibited Weapons, Appeal Procedure
Criminal Law Firearms Imitation Firearms Statutory Interpretation Possession of Prohibited Weapons Appeal Procedure

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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

William Bewley

Appellant

The Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a starting pistol with a partially drilled barrel constitutes a 'firearm' under s.57(1) of the Firearms Act 1968
  2. 2 Whether the use of external tools to discharge a missile from the pistol amounts to 'conversion' under the Firearms Act 1982
  3. 3 Whether the conviction under s.5(1)(aba) of the Firearms Act 1968 was proper

Ratio Decidendi

The starting pistol did not fall within the definition of a firearm under s.57(1) of the Firearms Act 1968 because it could only discharge a missile with the use of external tools and elaborate steps, amounting to conversion. The proper statutory approach after the Firearms Act 1982 is to consider whether the item is readily convertible as defined in the 1982 Act, which was not established in this case. The conviction under s.5(1)(aba) was therefore unsafe and must be quashed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; conviction quashed; sentence reduced

Orders

  • Conviction under s.5(1)(aba) of the Firearms Act 1968 quashed
  • Sentence of 2 years' imprisonment for escape from lawful custody quashed and substituted with 18 months' imprisonment