The court declined to make an order under the County Courts (Northern Ireland) Order 1980 art.61(6) directing a judge to state a case for the opinion of the Court of Appeal. The applicant had not identified any point of law decided by the judge and had not set out any proper grounds for compelling him to state a case.
In confiscation proceedings following money laundering offences, a judge had been entitled to conclude that a husband and wife had hidden assets and that there was no indication that those assets were less than the benefit sums calculated in the orders. Further, the wife had failed to show that her shop had provided an additional legitimate income that accounted for the unexplained credits to her accounts.
Charges against the former prime minister of Trinidad and Tobago of knowingly making false declarations as to his financial affairs had been brought within the five-year time limit under the Integrity in Public Life Act (Trinidad and Tobago) 1987. Although his convictions had been quashed for apparent bias by the chief magistrate, he had not been entitled to a stay of further proceedings.
A wasted costs order against the appellant firm of solicitors was upheld since a reasonable solicitor would have assumed that the work set out in a breakdown prepared by a forensic accountant was unnecessary. Accordingly the costs incurred for such work was unreasonable.
The Inland Revenue was “charged with the duty of investigating offences” within s.67(9) Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 when conducting a “Hansard interview”, so that Code C applied and the defendants should have been cautioned and a tape recording made of the interview. However, the Hansard evidence was introduced as lies told by the defendants relevant to their dishonest state of mind and its admission would not have had such an adverse effect on the fairness of the proceedings that the court ought not to have admitted it.