R v M and B

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
JudgeLord Justice Rix
Judgment Date11 December 2009
Neutral Citation[2009] EWCA Crim 2615
Docket NumberCase No: 200902557 B5
CourtCourt of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Date11 December 2009

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • R v Farah Damji
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 18 December 2020
    ...not intend to punish a blameless individual and its status as a matter of “constitutional importance”, was re-asserted in CPS v M [2009] EWCA Crim 2615; [2010] 4 All ER 51 at 46 Here, by the inclusion of the words “without reasonable excuse”, s. 5(5) meets the inherent objection to punishi......
  • S v Masingili and Others
    • South Africa
    • Invalid date
    ...(3d) 321): dictum in para 29 applied F R v Sappleton and Eubank 2010 ONSC 6132: compared. England Crown Prosecution Service v M & B [2009] EWCA Crim 2615: Legislation cited Statutes G The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, ss 12(1)(a), 35(3)(h) and 36: see Juta's Statutes o......
  • S v Masingili and Others
    • South Africa
    • Western Cape High Court, Cape Town
    • 20 March 2013
    ...(3d) 321): dictum in para 29 applied F R v Sappleton and Eubank 2010 ONSC 6132: compared. England Crown Prosecution Service v M & B [2009] EWCA Crim 2615: Legislation cited Statutes G The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, ss 12(1)(a), 35(3)(h) and 36: see Juta's Statutes o......
  • R v Wayne Johnson
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 10 March 2017
    ...without authorisation– (a) brings, throws or otherwise conveys a List B article into or out of a prison, … is guilty of an offence …" 7 In R v M [2009] EWCA Crim 2615 the Court considered whether an offence under S40(B)(1)(a) andS40(C)(1)(a) were of strict liability. Concluding that neither......
1 books & journal articles
  • The art of deterrence: Singapore’s anti-money laundering regimes
    • United Kingdom
    • Emerald Journal of Financial Crime No. 25-2, May 2018
    • 8 May 2018
    ...LJ in Msaid that: “Only a compellingcase for implying the exclusion of such an ingredient [mens rea]as a matterof necessity willsuffice”(M[2011] 1 WLR 822 at [23]).However, unlike the UK, this author was unableto find any case law in Singapore whichpresumes “mens rea”in statutoryprovisions. O......

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