Law report: Case summaries: 16 June 1997

The following notes of judgments were prepared by the reporters of the All England Law Reports.

Magistrates' courts

R v Bradford Magistrates' Court, ex p Daniel & anr; QBD Div Ct (Simon Brown LJ, Owen J) 6 June 1997.

Where the prosecution had offered no evidence on an information charging an offence triable either way, and no plea had been entered nor any determination made as to mode of trial, it was open to a defendant to submit to summary trial, plead not guilty, and have his case dismissed. A defendant would thus be entitled to plead autrefois acquit on fresh informations being laid charging the same offences.

John Lodge (Lamb & McGill, Bradford) for the applicants; Nicholas Campbell (CPS) for the respondent.

Crime

R v Staines & anr; CA Cr Div (Lord Bingham CJ, Latham J, Poole J) 24 April 1997.

Although the European Court of Human Rights had ruled in Saunders v United Kingdom (1997) 23 EHRR 313 that reliance at the appellant's trial in support of the case against him on answers given by him under compulsion to DTI inspectors, pursuant to s 177 96 of the Financial Services Act 1986, had rendered his trial unfair in that he had been denied the exercise of his right not to incriminate himself, domestic law remained as declared by the Court of Appeal in R v Saunders [1996] 1 Cr App R 463. The admission in evidence of answers which Parliament had said might be admitted could not, therefore, be regarded as unfair under s 78 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984.

David Gibson-Lee (Registrar of Criminal Appeals) for Mrs Staines; Stephen Batten QC, Alexander Cameron (Registrar of Criminal Appeals) for Mr Morrisey; Peter Clarke QC, James Eadie (DTI Solicitor) for the Crown.

Consumer law

MGN Ltd v Northamptonshire County Council; QBD Div Ct (Simon Brown LJ, Owen J) 9 June 1997.

In order to justify an advertisement which offered a pounds 50 watch for pounds 4.99 so as to defeat a prosecution under s 20(1) of the Consumer Protection Act 1987, it was necessary in all but exceptional cases to show that there were indeed articles of the description under offer already available for sale on the open market so that the necessary price comparison could be made. It was not sufficient to show that they became available two weeks after the date of the advertisement.

Alan Saggerson (Lovell White Durrant) for the appellant; Karl Scholz (Council Solicitor) for the respondent.