header-logo header-logo

Bull's-eye (2)

23 March 2007 / Nicholas Yeo
Issue: 7265 / Categories: Features , Fraud , Company , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

In his final article on the Fraud Act 2006, Nicholas Yeo discusses the common law conspiracy to defraud

Few would disagree with the Attorney General’s contention that, before the introduction of the Fraud Act 2006 (FrA 2006), deception offences were “too precise, overlapping and outmoded to give effective coverage over the breadth of frauds committed today” (speech to Annual Financial Crime Conference, 15 November 2005).

Before FrA 2006 came into force, on 15 January 2007, if a woman walked into a bank with a crude letter stating “please give this person £100” and her efforts failed, then the offence she would have committed would depend upon the form in which she was seeking to obtain the money:

  • if cash, the offence would be attempted obtaining property by deception (Theft Act 1968 (TA 1968), s 5);
  • if transfer to another account, then the offence would be attempted obtaining a money transfer by deception (TA 1968, s 15A); or
  • if she were accompanied by a collaborator, she would have committed a conspiracy to defraud at common law, but
If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll