The court reduced, from 11 years to 10 years’ imprisonment, the sentences imposed on the parents of a 17-week-old child following their convictions for causing or allowing her death. Although there were numerous aggravating features, including an attempt to cover up the circumstances of her death, insufficient weight had been given to the finding that the parents had had constructive, rather than actual, knowledge of the significant risk of serious harm to their child.

[2017] EWCA Crim 1686

Dual criminality had not been established to the required criminal standard by a European arrest warrant issued on charges of aiding and abetting tax evasion, which necessitated intention and actual knowledge, where a subsequent statement contained an allegation of “recklessness” and raised doubt as to precisely what was being alleged.

[2013] EWHC 710 (Admin)

The civil standard of proof was appropriate in determining, in claims to deduct input tax, whether traders knew or ought to have known that transactions they were involved in were connected to fraud. Such proceedings were not criminal or quasi-criminal, but concerned whether the traders had complied with all the conditions for claiming input tax.

[2011] UKFTT 641 (TC)

The conviction of a prosecution witness for contempt of court on the basis that he had failed to comply with a witness summons was quashed as he had been denied a fair opportunity to put his case.

[2011] EWCA Crim 1232

The Revenue and Customs Commissioners were entitled to refuse input tax repayment claims in respect of 29 transactions in computer processing units on the ground that the transactions were connected with the fraudulent evasion of VAT and the taxpayer knew that its transactions were so connected.

[2010] UKFTT 620 (TC)

A terminating ruling was reversed as the decision to terminate the proceedings should not have been made until after the accused taxi driver had given evidence, as his knowledge of a drug deal that took place whilst the taxi was stopped should have been tested and it was for him to prove his defence.

Given that a product might be “medicinal” either by presentation or by function under EU law, and that the presentation of a substance included its labelling or packaging, such labels were admissible as evidence under the Criminal Justice Act 1988 s.24 without the requirement for further evidence as to their chemical composition.

[2002] EWHC 2028 (Admin)