R v Ananthanarayanan
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 11 March 1993 |
| Date | 11 March 1993 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
20 cases
-
R v H (1995)
...so that you are sure that the girls are telling the truth". 18 On 11th March 1993 another constitution of this Court gave judgment in R v. Ananthanarayanan [1994] 98 Cr.App.R. 1. This was followed by another judgment of another constitution of this Court, as yet unreported, R v. Ryder dated......
- R v Ryder
-
R v H (1995)
...the appellant before your Lordships cited three recent decisions of the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division). The first of these is Reg. v. Ananthanarayanan [1994] 1 W.L.R. 788 in which the Court of Appeal held that if there existed a real risk that the evidence of one complainant might hav......
-
Lillie v Newcastle City Council
...550367. It is necessary, however, for me to bear in mind the Claimants’ submissions in the context of the problems thrown up by R v. Ananthanarayanan [1994] 1 W.L.R. 788 and in Hoch v. The Queen (1988) 165 C.L.R. 292, Federal Court of Australia. I must focus upon the essential principle. E......
Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
-
Subject Index
...2 AC 228 (HL)....................................... 270, 272, 273 THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EVIDENCE & PROOF 295 INDEXESR v Keane (1994) 98 Cr App R 1.............. 114, 122, 123, 124, 125, 127R v Kearns [2002] EWCA Crim 748,[2002] 1 WLR 2815 ..........................40R v Khan [1997] ......
-
Encoding similar facts - has it been worth the effort? An Australian experience
...effect; (b) give a direction relating to the absence of corroboration." 110 [1991] 2 AC 447 at 462. 111 [1995] 2 AC 596 at 626. 112 [1994] 2 All ER 847. 113 [1994] 2 All ER 859. 114 [1994] 2 All ER 872. 115 Section 164(2) provides that s 164(1) does not affect the operation of a rule of law......