Cassell and another (Appellant) v The Queen (Respondent) (Montserrat)

Cassell and another (Appellant) v The Queen (Respondent) (Montserrat)

The convictions were unsafe due to pervasive misdirections by the trial judge, including failure to properly direct the jury on dishonesty, conflation of knowledge with what the accused ought or was deemed to know, and improper judicial comment on the central issues. The proviso could not be applied as it could not be said that any properly directed jury must inevitably have convicted the appellants.

Citation
[2016] UKPC 19
Parties
First Appellant: Warren Cassell; Second Appellant: C&L Inc; Respondent: The Queen
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
04 July 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Court of Appeal to Privy Council
Outcome
Appeal allowed; convictions quashed; question of re-trial remitted to Court of Appeal; order for re-trial on count 14 quashed.
Legal Topics
Conspiracy to Defraud, Procuring Execution of Valuable Securities by Deception, Money Laundering, Misdirection of Jury, Dishonesty, Right of Pre Emption, Company Restoration
Criminal Law Company Law Conspiracy to Defraud Procuring Execution of Valuable Securities by Deception Money Laundering Misdirection of Jury Dishonesty Right of Pre Emption +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Warren Cassell

First Appellant

C&L Inc

Second Appellant

The Queen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Court of Appeal to Privy Council

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge misdirected the jury on the issue of dishonesty and the elements of conspiracy to defraud and deception
  2. 2 Whether the convictions were unsafe due to judicial comment and misdirection
  3. 3 Whether the proviso should be applied to uphold the convictions despite errors

Ratio Decidendi

The convictions were unsafe due to pervasive misdirections by the trial judge, including failure to properly direct the jury on dishonesty, conflation of knowledge with what the accused ought or was deemed to know, and improper judicial comment on the central issues. The proviso could not be applied as it could not be said that any properly directed jury must inevitably have convicted the appellants.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; convictions quashed; question of re-trial remitted to Court of Appeal; order for re-trial on count 14 quashed.

Orders

  • Convictions on all counts except 9, 10, 13, and 14 quashed.
  • No re-trial ordered on counts 9, 10, and 13.