R v Barton and another [2020] EWCA Crim 575 – test for dishonesty.
- test for dishonesty was established by obiter dicta of Supreme Court in Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd (displacing that given by Court of Appeal in R v Ghosh).
- Supreme Court may unanimously direct, through obiter dicta, that decision of Court of Appeal no longer be followed.
undefined: unpaid
Related case digests
- R v Ghosh [1982] 2 All ER 689 - TA.
- meaning of “dishonestly” – the [former] two limbed test. - Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd t/a Crockfords [2017] UKSC 67 – S 42 Gambling Act 2005.
1) cheating does not necessarily involve dishonesty and vice versa. 2) second leg of R v Ghosh test for dishonesty holds serious problems. 3) the meaning of “dishonesty” did not differ between civil and criminal proceedings. 4) R v Ghosh does not correctly represent the law. 5) correct test for dishonesty requires i) ascertaining subjectively D’s knowledge or belief as to the facts and ii) considering whether his conduct was honest or dishonest according to the objective standards of ordinary decent people. - not required that D appreciate what he has done is, by those standards, dishonest. 6) truthful evidence does not render D’s behaviour honest.