Results: 24

  • The Queen v Widdop

    23 Nov 1872 LR 2 CCR 3, Crown Cases Reserved

    Subsequent citations: 1.
    BANKRUPTCYExamination of BankruptIrregularity
  • The Queen v Francis

    08 May 1874 LR 2 CCR 128, Crown Cases Reserved

    EVIDENCEFalse PretencesPrevious Frauds
  • The Queen v Johnson

    25 Jan 1873 LR 2 CCR 15, Crown Cases Reserved

    PERJURYCoronerDeputy
  • R v Pembliton

    25 Apr 1874 LR 2 CCR 119, Crown Cases Reserved

    Subsequent considerations : 1 positive. Subsequent citations: 3.
    CRIMEMalicious injury to property24 & 25 Vict. c. 97, s. 51
  • The Queen v Lock

    23 Nov 1872 LR 2 CCR 10, Crown Cases Reserved

    ASSAULTConsentSubmission.
    KELLY, C.B. Had this been a case of rape, I might probably have had no hesitation in saying that a rape had not been committed. But here the charge is not one of rape; it is a charge of assault. And the question is, whether such an act as that of the prisoner done to a person who does not actively consent, but merely submits to the act under circumstances in which he cannot exercise his will either one way or the other does not, even in the absence of fraud, amount to an assault. I think it does. It
  • The Queen v Hazelton

    14 Nov 1874 LR 2 CCR 134, DC

    Subsequent citations: 3.
    CRIMEFalse pretencesCheque given for Goods
  • The Queen v Rebecca Goldsmith

    31 May 1873 LR 2 CCR 74, Crown Cases Reserved

    CRIMEFalse pretencesReceiving
  • The Queen v Henry Thomas

    23 Jan 1875 LR 2 CCR 141, DC

    Subsequent citations: 1.
    CRIMECounterfeit coinPrevious Conviction
  • The Queen v Weaver

    22 Nov 1873 LR 2 CCR 85, Crown Cases Reserved

    EVIDENCERegistration of BirthCertified Copy.
    Nov. 22. KELLY, C.B. Only two questions are raised in this case. The first is whether there was any evidence of the identity of the prosecutrix with the child to whom the certificate of registration purported to refer; and there can be no doubt that there was sufficient evidence. The second question is, whether the document which purported to be a certified extract from a register of births was admissible in evidence on its mere production by counsel. This depends upon two things. First, under the Registration Acts there can be no doubt that the registers of births are public
  • The Queen v Taylor (No 2)

    24 Apr 1875 LR 2 CCR 147, DC

    CRIMEAccessory before the factManslaughter

We use cookies on this website, you can read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. To use website as intended please Accept Cookies