All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

In a case this week involving Jet2 Holidays, Nottingham couple Karl and Laura Hughes claimed that they had suffered sickness while on a package holiday. They said they had food poisoning as a result of eating contaminated food or drink or swimming in the hotel’s unsanitary pool.

In witness statements, Mr and Mrs Hughes said that they became ill on the second day of their holiday and were acutely ill for the remainder of the holiday. The witness statements were sent to Jet2 with an initial letter of claim.

Jet2 looked at the social media accounts of Mr and Mrs Hughes. They saw photos and comments posted by them during the holiday, indicating they were physically well while away and had enjoyed their holiday. As a result, Mr and Mrs Hughes did not start proceedings against the company.

Contempt proceedings even where proceedings not commenced

Jet2 however, decided to ask the court to start contempt of court proceedings against Mr & Mrs Hughes. This was on the basis that the witness statements were false, relying on the social media posts.

Mr & Mrs Hughes denied that the information in their statements was false. They made further statements setting out that they had complained to the hotel manager, and despite their illnesses, they had “put up a front” that they were having a great holiday. The social media posts were not a true reflection of their mood at the time.

Initially, a court decided that proceedings for contempt of court could not be brought as the statements had not been served as part of court proceedings. A higher court did not agree saying that the test was whether the conduct in question involved an interference with the administration of justice either in a particular case or more generally as a continuing process.

The court went on to say that even though Mr and Mrs Hughes had not yet started proceedings when the statements were sent that they were still capable of interfering with the administration of justice.

The issue of whether Mr and Mrs Hughes were in contempt of court has not yet been decided, but Jet2 now have permission to bring those proceedings. The moral of the tale is just because something does not happen “in court” does not mean that you cannot be in “contempt of court”.

What could happen?

If Mr and Mrs Hughes are found guilty of contempt of court, they could be sent to prison for up to 2 years or receive a fine.

It can be very tempting to make a false claim against an insurer, but they are now fighting back in the civil courts. In addition, you could face criminal prosecution for fraud, leading in some cases to a prison sentence and criminal conviction.

Contact a specialist criminal law solicitor

If you are arrested or know that the police wish to speak to you about such a fraud arising from a holiday insurance claim then make sure you insist on your right to free and independent legal advice.

The advantages of such early advice legal advice can be found here.

If you have already been interviewed or face court proceedings we can still make a real difference to the outcome of your case.

Legal aid may well be available to fund your defence at court.

We have offices across the East Midlands and will happily travel across the country to provide representation for all football related offences.

Alternatively you can contact us using the form below.

All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

On 10th March 2001, HRH Prince Andrew is alleged to have met and been photographed with a lady who has accused the Prince of sexual misconduct.

In a BBC interview, Prince Andrew throws ridicule on that suggestion and throws up two interesting observations in an attempt to establish an alibi:

“On that particular day that we now understand is the date, which is 10th March, I was at home, I was with the children and I’d taken Beatrice to a Pizza Express in Woking for a party at I suppose sort of four or five in the afternoon.

“…and then because the duchess was away, we have a simple rule in the family that when one is away the other one is there.”

Understandably, a member of the Royal Family may well remember a trip to Pizza Express, usual for the rest of us, but perhaps not a typical dining arrangement for the privileged few.

 

Does this stack up as an alibi?

In law, an alibi is defined as follows:

“…evidence tending to show that by reason of the presence of an accused at a particular place or in a particular area at a particular time he was not, or was unlikely to have been, at the place where the offence is alleged to have been committed at the time of its alleged commission.”

The fundamental problem with Prince Andrew’s account is that this alibi can only recover what must have been a relatively short period of time, the journey to and from the restaurant (about 40 mins each way assuming the Prince was at his Windsor home) and time at the party itself (imagine 2 hours), so in total may be no more than 4 hours or so.

Unless the timing of the allegation is such that it corresponds precisely with the time Prince Andrew claims to have been in Woking  this alibi will be evidentially of little significance.

The next part of his account is also an alibi and amounts to a not unreasonable claim that he was at home (presumably looking out for the children, although he neglects to say this) because his wife was away.

Again, as a starting point, this is not at all unreasonable, but we have a direct contradiction of accounts and a photograph which has not been established to be anything other than genuine at the moment.

This clash of accounts would need to be tested by a jury in a criminal trial.

In short, mere assertions of alibi tend to be almost worthless. A robust defence strategy would nail down the times, and look for corroborative evidence. A prosecutor might easily find numerous occasions where both family members are away and ask about childcare arrangements – it is by no means unusual for members of the Royal Family to employ staff to look after children.

Regrettably for the Prince, his TV interview established nothing over and above a bare denial, which he had already given.  Indeed it appears that other aspects of his account are already being challenged – incapable of sweating and not one to hug.

The relevant video can be found here.

When our clients come to give an account on such a vital issue such as alibi, we ensure that a robust and detailed case is presented to the court.

When reputation and liberty are at stake, you should leave nothing to chance.

Contact a specialist criminal solicitor

If you are arrested or know that the police wish to speak to you about any offence then make sure you insist on your right to free and independent legal advice.

The advantages of such early advice legal advice can be found here.

If you have already been interviewed or face court proceedings we can still make a real difference to the outcome of your case.

Legal aid may well be available to fund your defence at court.

We have offices across the East Midlands and will happily travel across the country to provide representation for all football related offences.

Alternatively you can contact us using the form below.

All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

The Sentencing Council is consulting on a new guideline for some of the most commonly prosecuted firearms offences.  At the moment, guidance is to be found only in case law.  This can lead to a challenging sentencing exercise.

The purpose of the guideline is to provide consistency in sentencing for firearms offences.  The impact assessment does not suggest that any general increase in sentences is to be expected, although in many instances the Sentencing Council was met with a weak evidence base to evaluate this one way or the other.

If consistency is achieved, then you could expect some sentences to increase and some decrease.  Overall average sentence lengths for firearms offences should remain broadly level. However, experience with some other guidelines does suggest that sentence length may creep upwards.

Overall, we would expect it to be easier to predict the likely sentence that a person might receive on a plea or after trial.

One interesting observation is concerning statutory minimum sentences for some offences:

“The Council was surprised to note that exceptional circumstances were being found in around two thirds of disguised weapons cases (section 5(1A)(a)) which appeared to run counter to the principle that in order to justify the disapplication of the five year minimum, the circumstances of the case must be truly exceptional.”

The Council, therefore, felt that:

“Setting out the principles in a guideline is likely to lead to them being more consistently applied, which in turn could lead to exceptional circumstances being found in fewer cases.”

It was also noted that recent changes to Crown Prosecution Service charging guidance for some firearms offences would in itself lead to fewer mandatory sentence cases being prosecuted.

You can read more about the prosecution guidance here.

Cases where we argued to avoid a minimum sentence for our clients can be found here

and here

Which firearms offences will the new guideline cover?

Eight guidelines will cover the following offences in the Firearms Act 1968:

• Possession, purchase or acquisition of a prohibited weapon or ammunition
• Possession, purchase or acquisition of a firearm, ammunition or shotgun without a certificate
• Possession of a firearm or ammunition by person with previous convictions prohibited from possessing a firearm or ammunition
• Carrying a firearm in a public place
• Possession of firearm with intent to endanger life
• Possession of firearm or imitation firearm with intent to cause fear of violence
• Use of firearm or imitation firearm to resist arrest, possession of firearm or imitation firearm while committing a Schedule 1 offence or carrying firearm or imitation firearm with criminal intent
• Manufacture or sell or transfer or possess for sale or transfer or purchase or acquire for sale or transfer a prohibited weapon or ammunition.

The consultation runs until mid-January, so it is likely to be Summer 2020 before any new guidelines take effect.  That is not to say, however, that some judges will not have them in mind before then.

The link to the consultation can be found here.

Instruct a firearms offences expert

Although all of our lawyers are experienced in providing advice and representation in cases involving the unlawful possession of a firearm, our clients are also fortunate to be able to instruct firearms specialist Andrew Broome.

You can read about a successful defence of such a case here.

Firearms offences will always have the potential to be treated seriously by the courts upon conviction.  As a result, if you are arrested or know that the police wish to speak to you about any offending arising from your possession of a firearm then make sure you insist on your right to free and independent legal advice.

The advantages of such early advice legal advice can be found here.

If you have already been interviewed or face court proceedings we can still make a real difference to the outcome of your case.

Legal aid may well be available to fund your defence at court.

We have offices across the East Midlands and will happily travel across the country to provide representation for all football related offences.

Alternatively you can contact us using the form below.

All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

As the government prepares to bring us out of the European Union on 31^st October 2019, details have begun to emerge as to the legal and regulatory position if we leave without a deal.

Some of the first information released relates to firearms, although it regrettably raises more questions than it answers.

Given the importance of complying to the letter with firearms laws both here and abroad, those affected must take steps to keep up to date, and this may involve quite close monitoring over the next few weeks. The same is true in relation to other areas of regulatory and criminal law compliance.

 

What is the current situation?

A UK resident who wants to travel to the EU with their shotgun or a firearm can apply for a European Firearms Pass. This is a licence, or passport, that allows travel between member states, you must also have a licence from the UK to hold the firearm. Depending on the country you are travelling to, there may be other documents required. All weapons have to be declared to customs and also to the travel company you are using for transport.

Will the European Firearms Pass change?

If the UK leaves the EU without a deal, you will no longer be able to apply for a European Firearms Pass.

What will happen instead?

You will need to check the firearms licensing requirements of the country, before travelling.

This will also apply if you are in an EU country with the firearm with a European Firearms Pass at the time the UK leaves the EU.

What about visitors to the UK?

If you are sponsoring a visitor from the EU, who wants to bring a firearm to the UK, you need to apply to the local UK police force for a visitor’s permit. A permit that is issued before the UK leaves the EU remains valid until it has expired.

Once the UK leaves the EU, the European Firearms Pass will no longer be recognised for EU visitors to the UK. Sponsors of visitors will not need to show a valid Pass.

What should I do?

It is not yet known whether the UK will leave the EU without a deal in October. If you intend to travel with your firearm, it is advisable to check the licensing requirements of the country that you are visiting as countries have varying lead times for applying for licences. Without a proper licence, you may not be allowed to travel with your firearm.

Contact a firearms law specialist

If you are concerned with any aspect of regulatory criminal law and Brexit as it relates to firearms then get in touch for advice on the latest position.

Contact regulatory and firearms law specialist Andrew Broome at our Ilkeston office on 0115 9441233 or by email here.

All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

As Airbnb listings in London soar to 80,000, up 400% from 2015 figures, Westminster Council is cracking down on those who use the site to unlawfully sublet social housing, with over 1,500 investigations underway.

The council recovered £100,974 from Toby Harman, a social housing tenant who had been unlawfully letting his flat on Airbnb since 2013. He has also been evicted so the flat can be let to someone in genuine need.

Last year, the council recovered 24 homes from unlawful sub-letters.

 

Subletting social housing was made an offence in the Prevention of Social Housing Fraud Act 2013. It is a crime to sublet secure or assured tenancies with local authorities or other registered social housing providers.

A tenant (with a secure or assured tenancy) commits an offence if –

• he or she sub-lets the whole, or sometimes part, of the dwelling,
• the tenant ceases to occupy the dwelling as his or her only or principal home, and
• the tenant knows he or she is acting in breach of the tenancy.

A different, more serious offence is committed if you act dishonestly.

The law says that it is a defence if the sub-letting takes place as a result of violence or threats toward certain people. A further defence may arise if the person then occupying the house is entitled to apply to the court for a right to occupy or to have the tenancy transferred.

A person convicted of one of these offences is liable to a fine and, if they act dishonestly, could face six months in prison.

They are also liable to a new type of order introduced in the Act, Unlawful Profit Orders.

The making of one of these orders is how Westminster Council were able to recover the money from Mr Harman.  Under this power, the court must consider making an order that the defendant repays any profit to the landlord.

The maximum amount payable under Unlawful Profit Orders is the illicit amount received by the offender minus any rent paid to the landlord. The court may make an order for payment of any amount up to that ceiling, depending on the offender’s current means.

 

Unlawful profit orders can also be made in civil proceedings, where no criminal charges are brought.

Contact a crime and regulatory law solicitor

Contact crime and regulatory solicitor Martin Hadley on 0115 9599550 of you are contacted by a local authority who are investigating unlawful sub-letting.   Alternatively you can use the contact form below.  You will then be able to discuss any allegations of criminal conduct arising out of your use of your property with him.

We will be able to provide you with free and independent legal advice if the police are involved in any interview process, whether you are a volunteer or under arrest.  This is because be have a contract with the government to provide criminal legal aid.

Martin will discuss with you your options for funding any other interviews with the local authority or court proceedings.