In the Scottish Courts
| Published date | 01 April 1972 |
| DOI | 10.1177/002201837203600207 |
| Date | 01 April 1972 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
In
the Scottish Courts
PROOF
OF
FRAUD
Mackenzie v. Skeen
THE accused in Mackenzie v. Skeen (1972, S.L. T. 15) was a
foreman of
the
gutroom
and
gut
yard
of
an
abattoir.
He
was,
as such, in charge
of
the
disposal
of
offal.
This
offal was sold by
weight in barrels to a firm which
made
dog
food,
and
the
accused
had
the
duty
of
weighing the offal
and
entering the weights in
a book. Invoices were
prepared
from this book, on the basis
of
which weekly accounts were rendered to the buyers. After a series
of
checks
had
been instituted it
appeared
on a
number
of occasions
that
the
weights entered in the book were significantly less
than
the
actual
weights
of
the
offal
put
out
for collection by
the
buyers:
on
one
occasion when
the
police were carrying
out
acheck the
weight
of
one item was enteredin
the
book as
greater
than
the
actual
weight.
It
appears
that
the
offal was
not
always weighed,
but
its
weight estimated
"on
arough-and-ready basis calculated from
the average contents of a full
barrel".
In
these circumstances
the
foreman was charged
that
he
made
false returns to his employers
of
the
weight
of
offal dis-
patched
to
the
buyers,
"you
well knowing
that
the weights
recorded were deficient,
and
did
thus
defraud"
his employers
of
£87
45. sd., being
the
amount
of the discrepancies in
the
period
in question.
The
sheriff convicted,
and
rejected
the
defence
argument
that
the accused
had
not
induced
his employers to do
anything
so
that
there
had
been no practical result,
and
therefore
no fraud.
Her
view was
that
as a result
of
the
accused's actings
his employers
had
issued accounts to the buyers for substantially
less
than
was
due
by
them
and
had
lost
the
sum in
the
charge.
She held also
that
the
employers
had
been
induced
by a pretence
that
the book entries were accurate to send
out
quantities
of
offal
for which they received no payment.
It
had
not, however, been
proved
whether
the
invoices sent to
the
buyers
during
the period
of
the
check were accurate or not.
On
appeal
the
High
Court
quashed the conviction.
Lord
Clyde held
that
there was nothing in the findings to show
whether
during
the
period
of
the
charge the
abattoir
had
lost
any
money.
10
4
To continue reading
Request your trial