Blog
Rayner my parade! The importance of specialist advice.
Jemma Brimblecombe
Private prosecutions, once a “historical right” that was “rarely exercised” (according to Lord Wilberforce in Gouriet v Union of Post Office Workers (1978)), are now thoroughly integrated into our criminal justice system. Whether the result of dwindling CPS resources (see blog by David Sleight CPS and police struggle under the load of sex abuse investigations) or because of the public’s increased familiarity with the process from high-profile convictions such as ‘King Con’ or the Surfthechannel pirate, the number of private prosecutions being brought is on the rise.
Private prosecutions are a useful remedy for victims of crime and the only criminal remedy in circumstances where the state enforcement agencies fail to act. In cases of economic crime there will sometimes be merit in running concurrent civil and criminal proceedings. However, in such cases the motive for commencing criminal proceedings will inevitably be considered. It is established that a private prosecution motivated purely by spite or some other ‘oblique motive’ can lead the court to stay the proceedings as an abuse of process (R (Dacre) v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court [2009] 1 Cr App Rep). However, the Court of Appeal has recently sought to distinguish between mixed motives and ‘oblique’ motives and has provided useful insight into what factors may legitimately be considered in determining whether a private prosecution, alongside civil proceedings, may be upheld.
Ivey (Appellant) v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd t/a Crockfords (Respondent) [2017] UKSC 67.
When Sir Cliff Richard penned the lyrics to Summer Holiday in 1963 he could not have anticipated that the prospect of “no more working for a week or two” would be tested to its limits by some greedy holidaymakers. Whereas most of us are willing to splash a little cash to enjoy a few weeks on a sunny beach, and consider it a good investment of time and money, it seems that a few dishonest folk see it as an opportunity to make a buck by scamming their travel operator.
Criticism of charities’ right to prosecute alleged offenders is short-sighted and ignores the nature of justice, writes Melinka Berridge.
Jemma Brimblecombe
Charles Richardson
Oliver Oldman
Legal Notices | Privacy Notice | Fraud Warning | Modern Slavery Statement | Complaints | Website Terms | Cookie Policy | Accessibility | Site Map
© 2025 Kingsley Napley LLP. All rights reserved. Authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority, registration number 500046.
Skip to content Home About Us Insights Services Contact Accessibility