The Assizes
| Date | 01 April 1966 |
| DOI | 10.1177/002201836603000202 |
| Published date | 01 April 1966 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
The
Assizes
NO CONSPIRACY BETWEEN
THE
ONE MAN AND
HIS
COMPANY
R. v. McDonnell
THE principal point in this prosecution at the Bristol
assizes for conspiracy was the submission of counsel for
the
defendant
that
in
the
circumstances of the case there could
be no conspiracy, for the reason
that
there were not two per-
sons and two minds involved (1965, 3 W.L.R. II38). Nield,
J.,
was told
that
there was no English authority upon
the
particular point and so he said
that
he came to it only with
the
assistance of persuasive authorities from overseas and others
not directly in point. Nield,
J.
emphasised two things at
the
outset, namely,
that
it was
not
acompany which was being
proceeded against, it was an individual defendant, and,
secondly,
that
it was
"a
criminal trial and one of gravity so
that
problems of difficulty must at all times be resolved favourably
to an accused person".
The
defendant was a director and
the
sole person in each
of two companies responsible for the acts of the company.
He
was charged on an indictment containing ten counts: two of
the
counts (one in respect of each company) charged him
with conspiring with one of
the
companies to induce persons
to acquire aright or interest in land, four counts charged
him
with fraudulent conversion of
the
property of
the
com-
panies, and
the
remaining three charged him with knowingly
being aparty to carrying on
the
business of one of
the
com-
panies for a fraudulent purpose, failing to keep proper books
of accounts and, being adirector of one of
the
companies,
circulating a false statement, contrary to sections 332 (3) and
331
(I)
of the Companies Act, 1948, and section 20
(I)
and (2)
of
the
Larceny Act, 1916, respectively. Before
the
committing
justices the conspiracy charges had alleged conspiracy with
the
companies concerned
"and
with others unknown",
but
the
83
To continue reading
Request your trial