header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
16 November 2012
Issue: 7538 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Fraud

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Stevenson and another v Singh and others [2012] EWHC 2880 (QB), [2012] All ER (D) 76 (Nov)

In order to be liable as a conspirator participating in a conspiracy to use unlawful means, a party had to at least be aware of the means intended to be used, aware that the use of those means would be unlawful and agree to the use of those means. If the party in question had not been aware of the means intended to be used, or not aware that the use of those means would be unlawful, it could not be said that that party was a party to a combination to use unlawful means. It would rarely, if ever, be the case that clear evidence of an agreement or combination would be put before the court. Proof of a conspiracy was almost always going to depend upon drawing inferences from such evidence as was available, what were often referred to as “the over acts” performed pursuant to the alleged conspiracy. In order to establish liability for dishonestly assisting a party

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Forbes Solicitors—Stephen Barnfield

Forbes Solicitors—Stephen Barnfield

Regulatory team boosted by partner hire amid rising health and safety demand

Arc Pensions Law—Kris Weber

Arc Pensions Law—Kris Weber

Legal director promoted to partner at specialist pensions firm

Clarke Willmott—Jonathan Cree

Clarke Willmott—Jonathan Cree

Residential development capability expands with partner hire in Birmingham

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Mazur and more—inside the litigation frontline

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

NLJ this week: Social media bans for children spark legal dilemmas
Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
NLJ this week: Leasehold reform risks creating ‘forgotten freeholders’
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
NLJ this week: Court of Appeal clarifies when a claim truly begins
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
NLJ this week: Split FDRs could ease pressure—and boost settlements
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll