Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
LORD JUSTICE EDMUND DAVIES LORD JUSTICE KARMINSKI and MR. JUSTICE LAWTON ____________________
MR. N. INGLIS-JONES appeared on behalf of the Appellants. MR. D. WRIGHT appeared on behalf of the Crown. ____________________
All four now appeal against conviction on a certificate of the Deputy Chairman, and he has stated the question to be decided in these concise terms:
In addition, Bonner applies for leave to appeal against sentence; but that application does not need to be considered. Bonner also seeks leave to appeal against conviction on the ground that the verdict was unsafe or unsatisfactory. We have come to the conclusion that that application is well-founded and that in itself entitles him to be acquitted of this offence: and the same is true of his three co-accused.
The prosecution said that they were stealing the metal: Anderson and Anthony Town and Michael Town claimed they were moving it for Bonner, who they thought had a right to do what he had asked them to do. Bonner's defence was that he honestly thought he had a right to take the lead as it was partnership property owned by himself and Webb and, in any event, he did not intend to deprive Webb of it permanently.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
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.