R v Greig [2010] EWCA Crim 1183 – FA.
1) question for case to answer is; is there a case on which a properly directed jury could convict?
- case to answer does not require exclusion of all possible inferences other than that put forward by P.
- can be case to answer of false representation without direct evidence that a representation was made or as to what it was.
2) question for the jury (once there is a case to answer) is whether they could be sure the inference asserted by P was correct to the exclusion of any other.
undefined: unpaid
Related case digests
- Haringey (LB of) v Tshilumbe [2009] EWHC 2820 (Admin) – S 2(1)(a) FSA - reg 8 FHER.
1) justices findings of fact in case stated must be supported by their other findings or the statement of evidence. 2) operation of a food business does not require that food is sold – sufficient if food is supplied. 3) test for no case to answer per Galbrieth and Jabber - adverse inference suffices. 4) presence of people with plates of food is prima facie evidence of food business.