Crim

• Hierarchy of law


  • Constitution
  • Statute law
  • Common law
• Magistrates Court


  A court of summary jurisdiction, responsible for the dispensing and/or the administration of justice in courts of summary jurisdiction and their powers, privileges, rights and jurisdictions are subject to the provisions of statutes which confer such powers etc.
• Magistrates exercise their jurisdiction in magisterial districts established for that purpose
• R v Aughet: A Belgian soldier was tried and acquitted by a court-martial sitting at Calais, and was later indicted at the Central Criminal Court on a charge of unlawful wounding. Held that the court-martial was a court of competent jurisdiction and the appellant was entitled to rely on a plea of autrefois acquit.
• 1. G for Colony of Hong Kong v Kwok-a-Sing: A Chinese person who had taken refuge in Hong Kong was accused of murdering a French captain on a French ship at sea. Held that he could not be imprisoned and delivered up to the Chinese Government as the offence was against French law, not Chinese law.
• R v Hitchin: Justices declined jurisdiction over alleged driving offences committed at 'places unknown', as the words 'where the person charged... is for the time being' in the Transport Act 1968 related only to the point of commencement of proceedings, not the location of the alleged offences.
• Agard v Assistant Superintendent of Police: A magistrate had no jurisdiction to award compensation on his own initiative, as the empowering legislation only provided for an award 'upon the application of the person aggrieved'.
• R v Madan: Criminal proceedings against a person entitled to diplomatic immunity were without jurisdiction unless there was a valid waiver of that immunity by the chief representative of the state.
• Radwan v Radwan: A talaq divorce obtained at the Consulate General of the United Arab Republic in London could not be recognised under the Recognition of Divorces and Legal Separations Act 1971 as it was not obtained outside the British Isles.
• Kamara v DPP: An agreement to commit the tort of trespass to land, if accompanied by an intention to inflict more than nominal damage, was held to be a criminal conspiracy.
• Coroners Court


  The duties of the coroner are administrative, investigatory, judicial and preventative. The evidence taken in court shall be in the form of depositions. Witnesses are examined by the coroner first.
• R v Poplar Coroner: The coroner was held to have directed himself properly in deciding that the death of a person who died from a prolonged asthmatic attack was a natural death, despite a delay in the arrival of an ambulance.
• R v West Yorkshire Coroner: The father of a deceased person who had fallen to her death in Saudi Arabia sought an order of certiorari to quash the coroner's decision not to hold an inquest on the body, which had been returned to England.
• Bahamian vessel within the definition of section 10(4) of the Penal Code. The Bahamas Merchant Shipping Act 1976 section 128 refers to a master's willful breach of duty or neglect of duty that causes loss, destruction or damage of the ship. Section 277(2) provides that an unseaworthy vessel sent to sea likely to endanger life shall result in imprisonment.
• Regina v. Kent Justices. Ex parte Machin: Justices had no jurisdiction because they failed to explain to the defendant that he might be committed to quarter sessions for sentence if convicted summarily.
• R v Phillips and Quayle: The procedure of reading depositions to witnesses instead of examining them anew in the presence of the defendant was irregular and contrary to law.
• Davis v Morton: The withdrawal of a summons due to a technical informality was not equivalent to a dismissal that could be pleaded in bar of subsequent proceedings on the same matter.
• R v West: A magistrates' court has no jurisdiction to hear and determine an information of being an accessory after the fact to larceny under the Accessories and Abettors Act 1861.
• A magistrates' court has no jurisdiction to hear and determine an information of being an accessory after the fact to larceny under the Accessories and Abettors Act 1861 s.7
• The proceedings were void ab initio, the conviction which had been recorded should be set aside and annulled, and the appellant should be ordered to appear at the next quarter sessions to answer the indictment against him
• The crime of fraudulently obtaining Government funds by a false pretence was indictable in Jamaica under section 24(1) of the Criminal Justice (Administration) Act and, accordingly, a conspiracy to commit that crime was also indictable in Jamaica
• Where the actus reus of the crime of forgery was committed within the jurisdiction and the intent or other mens rea was also formed within the jurisdiction the crime was justiciable within the jurisdiction, even though the intended victim might be outside the jurisdiction
• Courts generally exercise criminal jurisdiction in respect of acts done or omissions made by its nationals or aliens within the territory of the state
• Courts also exercise jurisdiction over its nationals and aliens for acts done or omissions made


  • On the open sea within the territorial waters of the state
  • On board any ship of the state when on the high sea
  • On board any aircraft of or controlled by the state while in flights anywhere
• Whether an attempt to commit a crime was best described as a continuing offence or a series of offences, the defendant's attempts to obtain money by deception occurred at the moment of discovery, i.e., when three letters were seen by the pools promoters in Liverpool, and accordingly, since part of the crime was committed within the jurisdiction, the offences were triable in England
• The justices had had jurisdiction to try the offence as the exercise of the prerogative by the 1964 Order resulted in the tower being within territorial waters
• A lease of land includes the air space above, and a lease of single-storey ground floor premises would include the air space above
• An invasion of the air space, e.g., by an advertisement sign projecting from an adjoining building, gives rise to an action of trespass
• A conspiracy to commit a crime abroad is not indictable in England unless the contemplated crime is one for which an indictment would lie in England
• In order to have extraterritorial jurisdiction there has to be some framework. Arguably there is some common law that extends to jurisdictions such as conspiracy
• Statute didn't create power to exercise jurisdiction for matters outside the jurisdiction
• The presumption is that a statute creating a criminal offence did not, in the absence of clear and specific words to the contrary, make an act done by a foreigner outside the territorial jurisdiction of the Crown an offence triable in an English criminal court
• The physical act was done in England because insurance policies were taken out in this jurisdiction
• Most summary offenses must be brought "within six months from the time when the matter of such complaint or charge arose", unless the statute provides otherwise
• The day on which the alleged offence was committed was to be excluded from the computation of the calendar month within which the complaint was to be made
• The three-year period from the date on which the cause of action accrued applies for personal injury actions
• Calendar month


  The day on which the alleged offence was committed is to be excluded from the computation of the calendar month within which the complaint was to be made
• Limitation Act 1939 s.2(1)


  The three-year period from the date on which the cause of action accrued allowed by the Act did not expire until November 9, 1957
• Continuing offence


  The dates on which the matters of the informations arose were October 31 and December 22, 1939, and not August 29, 1939
• Fiat (a decree) or consent of the DPP/Attorney General is required