DPP v Merriman [1973] AC 584.
1) several acts but one activity - not duplicity.
2) joint charge - it matters not if Ds were acting in concert.
undefined: unpaid
Related case digests
- R v Bristol Crown Court, ex parte Willets (1985) 149 JP 416.
- multiple acts - not duplicity. 1) where same offence alleged in respect of five video tapes there was only one activity. 2) P need only prove one act to secure a conviction in relation to a composite information. - Carrington Carr Ltd v Leicestershire County Council (1994) 158 JP 570 - S 46 CCA - (r 12 MCA – r 7 CrimPR).
- consumer credit advertisements - duplicity. 1) not duplicity to allege a single advertisement to be misleading in a number of ways. - review of the five situations covered by the authorities on duplicity. 2) surveyors fees and legal fees were a “liability” to make a payment. 3) words in regulation requiring “at least” certain specified information to be provided in an advertisements mean that substantial compliance is insufficient. 4) advertisement, which held out that taking advantage of a scheme would make someone better off, made a comparative reference.