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 |
-
- 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
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Start Your 7-day Trial
13 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