Crime and Sentencing in UK Law

Leading Cases
  • R (Razgar) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
    • House of Lords
    • 17 Junio 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 Abril 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.

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

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

  • R v Boardman
    • House of Lords
    • 13 Noviembre 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.

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

  • Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire
    • House of Lords
    • 28 Abril 1988

    In some instances the imposition of liability may lead to the exercise of a function being carried on in a detrimentally defensive frame of mind. A great deal of police time, trouble and expense might be expected to have to be put into the preparation of the defence to the action and the attendance of witnesses at the trial. The result would be a significant diversion of police manpower and attention from their most important function, that of the suppression of crime.

See all results
Legislation
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