Singh v State
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judgment Date | 2006 |
| Date | 2006 |
| Court | Privy Council |
-
- 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
9 cases
-
Nigel Hunter and Others v R
...39 As for the stark assertion at the Board's principle ii) above as to the consequences of a failure to give the direction, in Singh v the State [2005] UKPC 35 [2006] WLR 146 at paragraph 30 Lord Bingham on behalf of the Board added a rider: "The significance of what is not said in a summin......
-
Gilbert v The Queen
...and coherence" of the circumstantial evidence." (See Lord Hope of Craighead in Balson v The State [2005] UK PC 6 at para 37.) 20 In Singh v The State [2005] UKPC 35 at p 14 [2006] 1 WLR 146 AT P 156 Lord Bingham said: "The significance of what is not said is a summing-up should be judged ......
-
Mark France and Rupert Vassell v The Queen
... ... actual appearance and that this could have raised questions about the reliability of his evidence is likely only to have thrown them into a state of confusion as to how to deal with the evidence that had actually been given and to ask them to embark on a speculative exercise of considering the ... the omission of a good character direction is not necessarily fatal to the fairness of the trial or to the safety of a conviction — Jagdeo Singh … [2006] 1 WLR 146 , para 25 and Bhola v The State [2006] 4 LRC 268 , paras 14–17. As Lord Bingham of Cornhill said at para 25 in Jagdeo ... ...
-
Johnson v R
...(ii) of Teeluck. After examining three appeals (viz: Balson v. State [2005] 4 L.R.C. 147; Uriah Brown v. R [2006] 1 L.R.C. 322 and Singh v. State [2006] 2 L.R.C. 409) in which the failure to give a good character direction had been held not to have affected the outcome of the trial, the ......
Request a trial to view additional results