Your World of Legal Intelligence
 United Kingdom | +44 (0) 20 7284 8080

R v Director of Serious Fraud Office, ex parte Smith

Weekly Law Reports The Law Reports The Times Law Reports Cited authorities 18 Cited in 125 Precedent Map Related
Vincent
JurisdictionUK Non-devolved
Judgment Date11 June 1992
Date11 June 1992
CourtHouse of Lords
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
104 cases
  • Dunnes Stores Ireland Company v Ryan
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 5 June 2002
    ...ACT 2001 S29(8) CONSTITUTION ART 40.6.1(1) HEANEY V IRELAND & AG 1996 1 IR 580 R V DIRECTOR OF SERIOUS FRAUD OFFICER EX PARTE SMITH 1993 AC 1CONSTITUTION ART 38 HEANEY V IRELAND 1994 3 IR 607 TIMES NEWSPAPERS LTD V UK 1979 2 EHRR 245 BANKRUPTCY ACT 1998 S21(4) COMPTROLLER & AUDITOR GENERAL......
  • R v Hertfordshire County Council, ex parte Green Environmental Industries Ltd and another
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 30 July 1997
  • Re Arrows Ltd (No 2)
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • Invalid date
  • S v Thebus and Another
    • South Africa
    • Invalid date
    ...dictum in paras B [46] - [49] applied R v Cleghorn 100 CCC (3d) 393 (SCC): discussed R v Director of Serious Fraud Office, Ex parte Smith [1993] AC 1 (HL) ([1992] 3 All ER 456): applied R v Garnsworthy and Others 1923 WLD 17: referred to R v Gilbert (1978) 66 Cr App R 237 (CA): dictum at 24......
    • Request a trial to view additional results
13 books & journal articles
  • Ireland: Curtailment of the right to silence through statutory adverse inferences
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage New Journal of European Criminal Law No. 12-3, September 2021
    • 1 September 2021
    ...s 35(4).8. Declan McGrath, Evidence (2nd edn, Thomson Round Hall 2014) 847. See also R v Director of Serious Fraud Off‌ice, exparte Smith [1993] AC 1, 32; [1992] 3 All ER 456, 465 (Lord Mustill) and Heaney v Ireland [1996] 1 IR 580, 589; [1997]1 ILRM 117, 126 (O’Flaherty J).9. State (McCart......
  • Scots Criminal Law and the Right of Silence
    • United Kingdom
    • Dundee Student Law Review No. IV-II, January 2018
    • 1 January 2018
    ...Dilemma?” (2002) 6(1) Edinburgh Law Review 25, 32. 85Ashif (n.65), [84] – [85]. 86R v Director of Serious Fraud Office ex parte Smith [1992] 3 WLR 66 HL, 74 (Lord Mustill) 87Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2016, s. 5(2)(a). 88Pamela R. Ferguson, “The Presumption of Innocence and Its Role in......
  • THE PRIVILEGE AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION AND RIGHT OF ACCESS TO A LAWYER
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 2013, December 2013
    • 1 December 2013
    ...For example, the accused has a right of silence and a right to a lawyer at the trial. 2R v Director of Serious Fraud Office, ex parte Smith[1993] AC 1 at 30. 3 The relevant portion of the Constitution of the United States reads: “No person … shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a w......
  • American Perspectives on Self-Incrimination and the Compelled Production of Evidence
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage International Journal of Evidence & Proof, The No. 6-4, December 2002
    • 1 December 2002
    ...of punishment along with the right of the accused not to take the witness stand at trial. Smith v Dfrector ofSertous Fraud Oflce [1992] 3 All ER 456. An American perspective on the right to silence is presented in M. Berger. ‘Rethinking Self- Incrimination in Great Britain’. 61 Den LJ 507 (......
    • Request a trial to view additional 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