R v Sinfield
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE |
| Judgment Date | 05 October 1981 |
| Neutral Citation | [1981] EWCA Crim J1005-7 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) |
| Docket Number | No. 5316/B/80 |
| Date | 05 October 1981 |
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
12 cases
-
R v P; R v Blackburn (Derek Stephen)
...who enters into and performs the SOCPA agreement. The general principles are well established in a series of decided cases. These include R v Sinfield [1981] 3CAR (s) 258, R v King [1986] 82 CAR 120, R v Sivan [1988] 87 CAR 407, R v Debbag and Izzet [1990–1] 12 CAR (S) 733, R v X [1994] 15 ......
-
Tyack v Mauritius
...authorities also stress as one factor that may affect the level of discount the danger that giving such assistance may involve (cf e.g. R v. Sinfield (1981) 3 CrAppR(S) 258, 259-260; R v. King, above at 230). There is no suggestion of any danger as a relevant factor in the present case. 34 ......
-
R v Bevens (Steven)
... ... And paragraph 41 itself must be seen in the context not merely of the judgment as a whole, but in particular the passages in the judgment beginning at paragraph 37 onwards, under the heading the Sentencing Decision. The general approach has been established at least since the judgment in Sinfield [1981] 3 Cr App re (S) 258 and repeated in many subsequent decisions in this court. The essential principle is that “no hard and fast rules can be laid down for what, as in so many other aspects of the sentencing decision, is a fact specific decision”. That principle holds good in all cases, ... ...
-
R v King (Michael)
...as well. 11 The reasoning behind this practice is expediency, as this court has pointed out in a number of cases, including the case of R. v. Sinfield (1981) 3 Cr.App.R.(S.) 258. One of the roost effective weapons in the hands of the detective is the informer. Once the identity of a suspect......
Get Started for Free