“Court of Appeal establishes landmark two-stage test for dishonesty in criminal law”
Dr Ghosh, a locum consultant, claimed fees for operations he had not performed and for patients he had not treated. He was charged with obtaining property by deception contrary to section 15 of the Theft Act 1968.
What is the correct test for determining dishonesty in criminal law, particularly whether a purely objective test should apply or whether the defendant's own standards of honesty are relevant?
The Court of Appeal held that dishonesty requires a two-stage test: first, whether the defendant's conduct was dishonest by the ordinary standards of reasonable and honest people (objective test), and second, whether the defendant realised that reasonable and honest people would consider the conduct dishonest (subjective test).
This case established the definitive test for dishonesty in English criminal law, which has been applied across numerous property offences and fraud cases. The Ghosh test remained the leading authority for over 35 years until partially modified by Ivey v Genting Casinos in 2017.
You're reading the free summary of R v Ghosh. Create a free account to unlock the full reasoning, the cited authorities and the verbatim judgment — plus structured briefs for 412,000+ UK judgments.
No card required. Free forever.
OSCOLA Citation
R v Ghosh [1982] QB 1053 (CA)
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Falls back to Google for old citations BAILII catalogues separately
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.