placeholder-image coin

R v. Rimmington [2005] UKHL 63 (21 July 2005)

R v. Rimmington [2005] UKHL 63 (21 July 2005)


Citation:R v. Rimmington [2005] UKHL 63 (21 July 2005)

Link to case on WorldLII.

Rule of thumb:What is the legal standard for prosecuting a person? There must be a criminal law which is fairly in point in order for a person be prosecuted for a criminal offence.

Judgment:

The Court affirmed & established the test for a prosecution being brought – it stated that there must either be a clear past precedent in case law, or a clear statutory provision stating that it is a crime, otherwise the case cannot be brought. Where these do not exist and cannot be specifically pointed to then the prosecution is deemed to be vexatious. The Court also affirmed that where the common law is being developed, this is to be done incrementally, and not in one large leap.

centered image

Ratio-decidendi:

‘33. …There are two guiding principles: no one should be punished under a law unless it is sufficiently clear and certain to enable him to know what conduct is forbidden before he does it; and no one should be punished for any act which was not clearly and ascertainably punishable when the act was done. If the ambit of a common law offence is to be enlarged, it ‘must be done step by-step on a case-by-case basis and not with one large leap’: R v Clark (Mark) [2003] 2 Cr App R 363, para 13’

Warning: This is not professional legal advice. This is not professional legal education advice. Please obtain professional guidance before embarking on any legal course of action. This is just an interpretation of a Judgment by persons of legal insight & varying levels of legal specialism, experience & expertise. Please read the Judgment yourself and form your own interpretation of it with professional assistance.