Someone recently bought our

students are currently browsing our notes.

X

Attorney-General’s Ref (No. 1 of 1975)

[1975] 2 All ER 684

Case summary last updated at 10/01/2020 16:08 by the Oxbridge Notes in-house law team.

Judgement for the case Attorney-General’s Ref (No. 1 of 1975)

 D laced V’s drink secretly, knowing that V would drive soon. He was charged with aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring a motoring offence and was acquitted with “no case to answer”. CA said this was wrong since he HAD procured an offence surreptitiously. He said that Aid, abet, counsel and procure must mean different things since parliament would not have used four words if one or two would do. In this case D “procured” the crime, since “procure” means “to produce by endeavour”. The terms should be given ordinary meaning. 

Have you seen Oxbridge Notes' best Criminal Law study materials?

Our law notes have been a popular underground sensation for 10 years:

  • Written by Oxford & Cambridge prize-winning graduates
  • Includes copious adademic commentary in summary form
  • Concise structure relating cases and statutes into an easy-to-remember whole
  • Covers all major cases for LLB exams
  • Satisfaction guaranteed refund policy
  • Recently updated
Criminal Law Notes

Criminal Law Notes >>