Crime and Sentencing in UK Law

Leading Cases
  • R (Razgar) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
    • House of Lords
    • 17 June 2004

    (4) If so, is such interference necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others?

  • Woolmington v DPP
    • House of Lords
    • 05 April 1935

    Throughout the web of the English Criminal Law one golden thread is always to be seen that it is the duty of the prosecution to prove the prisoner's guilt subject to what I have already said as to the defence of insanity and subject also to any statutory exception. No matter what the charge or where the trial, the principle that the prosecution must prove the guilt of the prisoner is part of the common law of England and no attempt to whittle it down can be entertained.

  • R v Galbraith
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 19 May 1981

    (b) Where however the prosecution evidence is such that its strength or weakness depends on the view to be taken of a witness's reliability, or other matters which are generally speaking within the province of the jury and where on one possible view of the facts there is evidence upon which a jury could properly come to the conclusion that the defendant is guilty, then the Judge should allow the matter to be tried by the jury. (b) Where however the prosecution evidence is such that its strength or weakness depends on the view to be taken of a witness's reliability, or other matters which are generally speaking within the province of the jury and where on one possible view of the facts there is evidence upon which a jury could properly come to the conclusion that the defendant is guilty, then the Judge should allow the matter to be tried by the jury.

  • R v Boardman
    • House of Lords
    • 13 November 1974

    The test must be—is the evidence capable of tending to persuade a reasonable jury of the accused's guilt on some ground other than his bad character and disposition to commit the sort of crime with which he is charged? The similarity would have to be so unique or striking that common sense makes it inexplicable on the basis of coincidence.

  • Norris v Government of the United States of America (No 2)
    • Supreme Court
    • 24 February 2010

    It is of critical importance in the prevention of disorder and crime that those reasonably suspected of crime are prosecuted and, if found guilty, duly sentenced. Extradition is part of the process for ensuring that this occurs, on a basis of international reciprocity. It is instructive to consider the approach of the Convention to dealing with criminals or suspected criminals in the domestic context.

  • Huang v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Abu-Qulbain v Same; Kashmiri v Same
    • House of Lords
    • 21 March 2007

    In an article 8 case where this question is reached, the ultimate question for the appellate immigration authority is whether the refusal of leave to enter or remain, in circumstances where the life of the family cannot reasonably be expected to be enjoyed elsewhere, taking full account of all considerations weighing in favour of the refusal, prejudices the family life of the applicant in a manner sufficiently serious to amount to a breach of the fundamental right protected by article 8.

  • Dorset Yacht Company Ltd v Home Office
    • House of Lords
    • 06 May 1970

    To give rise to a duty on the part of the custodian owed to a member of the public to take reasonable care to prevent a Borstal trainee from escaping from his custody before completion of the trainee's sentence there should be some relationship between the custodian and the person to whom the duty is owed which exposes that person to a particular risk of damage in consequence of that escape which is different in its incidence from the general risk of damage from criminal acts of others which he shares with all members of the public.

See all results
Legislation
  • Sentencing Act 2020
    • UK Non-devolved
    • January 01, 2020
    ...... (b) (b) is still to determine to send, or whether to send, the offender to the Crown Court for trial under section 51 or 51A of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, for one or more related offences, . it must adjourn the proceedings relating to the offence until after it has made those ......
  • Serious Crime Act 2015
    • UK Non-devolved
    • January 01, 2015
    ...... . . "(3A) In this section "priority order" means any of the following-. . (a) a compensation order under section 130 of the Sentencing Act;. . . (b) an order requiring payment of a surcharge under section 161A of the Criminal Justice Act 2003;. . . (c) an unlawful profit order ......
  • Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012
    • UK Non-devolved
    • January 01, 2012
    ...... . (5) In consequence of the amendments made by this section omit-. . . (a) paragraph 9(6) of Schedule 1 to the Violent Crime Reduction Act 2006;. . . (b) paragraph 80 of Schedule 4 to the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008;. . . (c) paragraph 24 of Schedule 25 to ......
  • Coroners and Justice Act 2009
    • UK Non-devolved
    • January 01, 2009
    ...... . Other offences. . S-70 . Genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes 70 Genocide, crimes against humanity and ... . (4) In section 57D (continued use of live link for sentencing hearing following a preliminary hearing)— . . (a) in subsection (2) ......
See all results
Books & Journal Articles
See all results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT