House of Lords
| DOI | 10.1177/002201835702100307 |
| Published date | 01 July 1957 |
| Date | 01 July 1957 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
House of Lords
CONSPIRACIES TO
COMMIT
ACTS ABROAD
Board of Trade v. Owen
"AT
all periods of
our
history it has been far more difficult to
extend the criminal law by a process of judicial decision
than
any other branch of the law.
There
has always been a
wholesome dread of enlarging its boundaries by anything
short of an Act of the legislature."
This
quotation from Sir
William Holdsworth's History
of
English Law was made in the
speech of
Lord
Tucker
in giving his opinion in Board of Trade
v. Owen (1956, 2
W.L.R.
351), the other members (Lords
Simonds,
Morton
of Henryton, Radcliffe and Somervell of
Harrow) expressing their agreement with that opinion.
The
House upheld the decision (see 1956, 3
W.L.R.
739) of the
Court
of Criminal Appeal that aconspiracy to commit acrime
abroad is
not
indictable in this country unless the contemplated
crime is one for which an indictment would lie here.
Lord
Tucker
reserved for future consideration the question whether
aconspiracy in this country which is wholly to be carried out
abroad may not be indictable here on proof that its perform-
ance would produce apublic mischief in this country or injure
aperson here by causing him damage abroad.
Thus
the
opinion given by Donovan,
J.,
at the Central Criminal Court
(see vol. xx of this
JOURNAL,
page 330) has not been upheld.
It
is sufficient to set out quite shortly the essential facts on
which the decision of the House of Lords was based.
The
respondents were convicted on an indictment charging
them
with aconspiracy in London to defraud an export control
department (known as Z.A.K.) of the Federal Republic of
Germany by causing Z.A.K. to grant licences to export certain
metals from Germany by fraudulently representing to Z.A.K.
that
the metals would be supplied to and consumed by Irish
246
To continue reading
Request your trial