The case concerned the use of so-called Norwich Pharmacal orders obtained in the civil courts in aid of private prosecutions; and whether the wording of a settlement agreement in civil proceedings acted as a bar to subsequent criminal proceedings.

ADDED Friday 10^th December 2021

Was there any legal requirement upon a person on whom the police wished to serve a Fixed Penalty Notice under the Health Protection (Coronavirus Restrictions) (Wales) Regulations 2020 to supply his name and address to the police officer in question?

ADDED Wednesday 8^th December 2021

Should a Lucas direction be given, or replicated in similar terms, in relation to established lies told by a prosecution witness, where the defendant’s case is that it was that prosecution witness who was the actual perpetrator of the crime in question?

ADDED Monday 6^th December 2021

A newspaper sought to appeal from a trial judge's refusal either to revoke a reporting restriction order or, in the alternative, to make a so-called ‘excepting direction’ that it was in the public interest for that restriction to be removed or relaxed.

ADDED Wednesday 1^st December 2021

Having allowed the prosecutor’s appeal against the amount of the confiscation order made in the Crown Court, the Court of Appeal had then directed that a rehearing of the merits of the confiscation application should take place before the CACD itself.

ADDED Tuesday 30^th November 2021

The case was concerned with the scope of section 19 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (the prohibition on the carrying on of any ‘regulated activity’ by anyone other than an authorised or exempt person) and its associated provisions.

ADDED Friday 26^th November 2021

The case concerned the scope and operation of the open justice principle in relation to applications for Account Freezing Orders under POCA and the Magistrates’ Courts (Freezing and Forfeiture of Money in Bank and Building Society Accounts) Rules 2017

ADDED Thursday 25^th November 2021

A company claimed from its directors the secret profits generated by their criminal scheme in breach of fiduciary duty. And the CPS claimed that a confiscation order made against the directors took precedence in being enforced against those assets.

ADDED Monday 22^nd November 2021

Where a confiscation order was made against company directors, could the CPS enforce that order against the identified proceeds of the fraud in priority to the proprietary claim of the company whose directors were the chief engineers of the fraud?

ADDED Friday 19^th November 2021

Did a corporate defendant have a fair trial where the individuals, who were said to be its DMWs and whose culpability was said to be attributable to the company under the 'identification' or 'attribution' principle, had been absent from the trial?

ADDED Thursday 18^th November 2021