Offences against the Person in UK Law

Leading Cases
  • R v Hodgson
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 26 Set 1967

    Where the offence or offences are in themselves grave enough to require a very long sentence. Where it appears from the nature of the offences or from the Defendant's history that he is a person of unstable character likely to commit such offences in the future, and 3. Where if the offences are committed the consequences to others may be specially injurious, as in the case of sexual offences or crimes of violence.

  • Woolmington v DPP
    • House of Lords
    • 05 Abr 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 Camplin
    • House of Lords
    • 06 Abr 1978

    He should then explain to them that the reasonable man referred to in the question is a person having the power of self-control to be expected of an ordinary person of the sex and age of the accused, but in other respects sharing such of the accused's characteristics as they think would affect the gravity of the provocation to him; and that the question is not merely whether such a person would in like circumstances be provoked to lose his self-control but also would react to the provocation as the accused did.

  • R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Doody ; R v Same, ex parte Pierson ; R v Same, ex parte Smart ; R v Same, ex parte Pegg
    • House of Lords
    • 24 Jun 1993

    Fairness will very often require that a person who may be adversely affected by the decision will have an opportunity to make representations on his own behalf either before the decision is taken with a view to producing a favourable result: or after it is taken, with a view to procuring its modification; or both.

  • R v Cooper (Sean)
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 08 Nov 1968

    That means that in cases of this kind the Court must in the end ask itself a subjective question, whether we are content to let the matter stand as it is, or whether there is not some lurking doubt in our minds which makes us wonder whether an injustice has been done. This is a reaction which may not be based strictly on the evidence as such; it is a reaction which can be produced by the general feel of the case as the Court experiences it.

  • Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire
    • House of Lords
    • 28 Abr 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.

  • R v Merriman
    • House of Lords
    • 19 Jul 1972

    But in answering the question it is important to consider what is meant by a “joint charge”. In my view, it only means that more than one person is being charged and that within certain rules of practice or convenience it is permissible for the two persons to be named in one count. The offences charged in the present case were individual charges against each of the brothers.

See all results
Legislation
See all results
Books & Journal Articles
See all results
Law Firm Commentaries
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