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.
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.
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.
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.
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.