1998/49 - AG v Young & Williams [1998] UR 49 (10 March 1998)
On the ordinary meaning of Article 12(c), both the Troy and Young arrangements are arrangements with respect to property other than securities, namely foreign currency, and their purpose was to enable participants to receive profits from acquisition, holding, management, or disposal of such property. The reasoning in Hughes v Trapnell does not apply due to differences in statutory language.
- Citation
- [1998] UR 49
- Parties
- Prosecution: The Crown; Defendant: Troy; Defendant: Mayo
- Jurisdiction
- Jersey
- Judgment Date
- 10 March 1998
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Ruling on Submission of No Case to Answer
- Outcome
- Submissions of no case to answer overruled; case to proceed.
- Legal Topics
- Fraud, Investment Schemes, Interpretation of Statutory Provisions
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
The Crown
Prosecution
Troy
Defendant
Mayo
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Ruling on Submission of No Case to Answer
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the arrangements in question fall within Article 12(c) of the Depositors and Investors (Prevention of Fraud) (Jersey) Law, 1967
- 2 Whether the interpretation of similar English legislation (Hughes v Trapnell) applies to the Jersey provision
Ratio Decidendi
On the ordinary meaning of Article 12(c), both the Troy and Young arrangements are arrangements with respect to property other than securities, namely foreign currency, and their purpose was to enable participants to receive profits from acquisition, holding, management, or disposal of such property. The reasoning in Hughes v Trapnell does not apply due to differences in statutory language.
Court Disposition
Submissions of no case to answer overruled; case to proceed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment