Ivey v Genting Casinos - An analysis by 3PB Criminal Barrister Thomas Evans
5th December 2017
Criminal Barrister Thomas Evans analyses Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd t/a Crockfords [2017] UKSC67 and the test for dishonesty applied in criminal courts.
To read Thomas' analysis, please click here.
Related News
-
3PB Barristers' criminal barrister Nate Lara has successfully secured an acquittal for his client in relation to two allegations of exposure in a case heard at Portsmouth Crown Court. DH faced allegations of exposing himself to a family member on numerous occasions both in person and by phone. DH accepted that he committed the acts, however he denied his intention was to cause harm, as the law requires. The prosecution relied on DH’s responses in...
Continue reading -
Berenice Mulvanny 3PB Barristers' specialist criminal law barrister, led her fellow Crime and Regulatory crime colleague Graham Gilbert, in securing the conviction of 82-year old former teacher David Clarke. After a five-week trial at Brighton Crown Court, Mr Clarke was convicted unanimously of 45 counts of historic sexual offending against 14 boys committed whilst he was a teacher at a (now closed) private prep school in Sussex during the late 1970’s and 1980’s. Clarke's conviction...
Continue reading -
Laura Deuxberry, 3PB's criminal, regulatory and public law barrister, was instructed by the CPS Special Crime Division in London, led by Kevin Dent KC, in the recent case of How and Yang [2026] EWCA Crim 476. Appearing in the Court of Appeal, the appellants argued that the original trial judge, HHJ Ashworth, should have allowed their submission of no case to answer on the trafficking charge. The Court of Appeal heard the appeal of the two appellants, one of whom...
Continue reading -
3PB Barristers’ specialist criminal defence barrister Nick Robinson has secured the acquittal of a vulnerable young defendant. The prosecution’s case was that vulnerable defendant, then aged 18, had raped a 15-year-old girl at a residential address in November 2021. The defendant had a full-scale IQ of 64 (first percentile), the language skills of a child aged between six and nine, markedly impaired memory and pronounced suggestibility under pressure. The complainant was also a vulnerable witness,...
Continue reading
