The following Corporate Crime practice note provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:
Coronavirus (COVID-19): This Practice Note contains guidance impacted by the Coronavirus Act 2020 (CA 2020). CA 2020, among other measures, grants power to the Secretary of State to extend the length of time that biometric samples such as fingerprints and DNA are able to be retained for national security purposes by six months, up to a maximum of 12 months. Please see CA 2020, s 24, the Coronavirus (Retention of Fingerprints and DNA Profiles in the Interests of National Security) Regulations 2020, SI 2020/391 and the Coronavirus (Retention of Fingerprints and DNA Profiles in the Interests of National Security) (No. 2) Regulations 2020, SI 2020/973. For updates on key developments and related practical guidance on the implications for lawyers, see: Coronavirus (COVID-19) and the criminal justice system—overview and Coronavirus (COVID-19) toolkit.
The procedure for the taking, retaining and destroying fingerprints, footwear impressions, DNA samples and the profiles derived from those samples was set out in Part 5 of Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE 1984). Following the implementation of PACE 1984 and the Codes which support the Act amendments to the regime were made by the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 (CJPOA 1994) which enabled DNA samples to be taken from anyone charged with, reported for summons, cautioned or convicted of a recordable offence; and allowed profiles
**Trials are provided to all LexisPSL and LexisLibrary content, excluding Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance, subscription packages are tailored to your specific needs. To discuss trialling these LexisPSL services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial.
Existing user? Sign-in
Take a free trial
Tipping off and prejudicing an investigationIt would undermine the benefit to the authorities if, a suspicious activity report (SAR) having been made, the alleged offender were to be made aware of the interest in their activities so that they could take steps to cover up their misdeeds or disappear.
The offence of causing grievous bodily harm with intentWounding or causing grievous bodily harm (GBH) with intent is triable only in the Crown Court on indictment. Elements of the offence Under the Offences against the Person Act 1861 (OATPA 1861), the prosecution must prove the defendant unlawfully
Issue estoppel is a sub-species of the res judicata doctrine (see Practice Note: The doctrine of res judicata). In addition to the general key requirements for establishing a res judicata (see Practice Note: Key requirements to establish a res judicata), this Practice Note considers the specific
This Practice Note considers claims for damages for breach of statutory duty. For guidance on claims for damages for a negligent breach of duty of care outside a statutory duty, see Practice Notes:•Negligence—when does a duty of care arise?•Negligence—when is the duty of care breached?Breach of
0330 161 1234
To view our latest legal guidance content,sign-in to Lexis®PSL or register for a free trial.