Coram: Lord Justice Auld, Mr Justice Newman and Mr Justice Roderick Evans
The defendant appealed a conviction for hiding assets from her receiver following her bankruptcy. He said that recent case law suggested that the burden of establishing the defence under section 352 was evidential only.
Held: The conviction predated the Human Rights Act, and was correct at the time. The Carass ruling applied also to the instant section, but since the issue related to interpretation of a statute, and new interpretations of statutes were not retrospective.
Statutes: Insolvency Act 1986 352, Human Rights Act 1998 3(1)
This case cites:
- - Distinguished - Regina -v- Clive Louden Carass CACD (Times 21-Jan-02, Bailii, Gazette 27-Feb-02,  EWCA Crim 2845,  1 WLR 1214,  2 Cr App R 4)
When a defendant was accused of an offence under the section, and wished to raise a defence under sub-section 4, the duty of proof placed on him by the sub-section amounted to a duty to bring sufficient evidence to raise the defence, and the section . .
- Applied - Regina -v- Lambert HL (Times 06-Jul-01, Bailii, House of Lords, Gazette 31-Aug-01,  3 WLR 206,  UKHL 37,  2 AC 545,  1 All ER 2,  HRLR 55,  2 Cr App R 28,  UKHRR 1074,  3 All ER 577)
The defendant had been convicted for possessing drugs found on him in a bag when he was arrested. He denied knowing of them. He was convicted having failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that he had not known of the drugs. The case was . .
- Cited - Jayasena -v- The Queen PC ( AC 618)
'Their Lordships do not understand what is meant by the phrase 'evidential burden of proof'. They understand, of course, that in trial by jury a party may be required to adduce some evidence in support of his case, whether on the general issue or on . .
- Cited - Ong Ah Chuan -v- The Public Prosecutor PC ( AC 648,  3 WLR 855,  Crim LR 245)
(Singapore) It was asked whether the mandatory death sentence for trafficking in more than 15 grammes of heroin was unconstitutional. The appellant submitted that the mandatory nature of the sentence rendered it arbitrary, since it debarred the . .
This case is cited by:
- - Cited - Barnfather -v- London Borough of Islington Education Authority, Secretary of State for Education and Skills QBD (Bailii,  EWHC 418 (Admin), Times 20-Mar-03,  1 WLR 2318)
The appellant was convicted of the crime of being a parent whose child had failed to attend school regularly. She challenged saying that the offence required no guilty act on her part, but was one of strict liability, and contrary to her human . .
- Cited - Griffin, Regina (on the Application of) -v- Richmond Magistrates' Court QBD (Bailii,  EWHC 84 (QB))
- Cited - Regina -v- G (Secretary of State for the Home Department intervening) HL (Bailii,  UKHL 37, Times 20-Jun-08,  1 WLR 1379, HL,  1 AC 92,  1 Cr App R 8,  HRLR 36,  UKHRR 72,  3 All ER 1071,  Crim LR 818)
The defendant was fifteen. He was convicted of statutory rape of a 13 year old girl, believing her to be 15. He appealed saying that as an offence of strict liability he had been denied a right to a fair trial, and also that the offence charged was . .
Insolvency, Human Rights, Crime