Suffolk Trading Standards v Rogers [2014] EWCA Crim 1680 – S 327(1) and s 340(11)(d) POCA - s 5(1) IA – r 1.1 CrimPR – (IA 1978).
1) no injustice in amendment to allege different offence where the facts which D had to meet remained the same.
2) money laundering offences under POCA have extra-territorial effect.
- modern approach to international scope of national jurisdiction.
3) fact that two factually related offences (a substantive offence and a conspiracy) had a common element did not mean that one offence was subsumed into the other.
undefined: unpaid