Conspiracy to Defraud Flashcards
Walker
discussion about the possibility of fraudulent behavior is NOT sufficient as there must be a firm decision
Banks
there is no conspiracy if two people happen to have the same thought or intention but have not communicated this
Scott
there is no requirement that there must be a falsehood or that anyone must actually be deceived
Welham v DPP
the core of the offence is disadvantage to others and NOT gain to self or others
Allsop
it is sufficient that the conspiracy puts at risk the economic or property rights or interests of V; she NEED NOT suffer loss
Goldshield Group Plc
Cartel agreements to fix prices will not be covered by conspiracy to defraud excepting some aggravating factor, such as fraud, misrepresentation, violence etc
Scott v MPC
where V is a person performing public duties it is sufficient if the purpose of the conspiracy is to cause him to act contrary to his duty
Withers v DPP
the “public duty” limb should not be extended beyond defrauding a public official because the offence of fraud is over-broad
Nock
Impossibility (legal or physical, or where V cannot be deceived) is a defence to conspiracy to defraud
O’Brien
D must intend to carry out his part of the agreement
Wai Yu Tsang
The definition of conspiracy to defraud - the conspirators agree dishonestly to bring about a state of affairs which they realize will deceive V into so acting, or failing to act, that his economic interests will be put at risk
Weaver
The offence covers “every kind and description of fraudulent statement, conduct, trick, or device.” Hollinshead shows that deceitful means are sufficient.
Tillings and Tillings (NOTE)
Conspiracy to defraud is committed where D’s agree to use fraudulent means to persuade a testator to change her will in favor of Ds (NOTE - this is not theft of an equitable interest; potential beneficiaries only have a spes successionis rather than a proprietary right).
