October 30 2009
START DATE
END DATE
November 13 2009
Lyndon Raynor v. Edna Matthews
COURT:
LAW:
JUDGE(S):
CLAIMANT'S LAWYER:
DEFENDANT'S LAWYER:
The Supreme Court of Bermuda
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Kawaley J
Mr. Robert Welling
Mr. Allan Doughty
FACTS OF THE CASE:
Edna Matthews was charged with stealing $44320 from her employer sparking both civil and criminal proceedings. Civil proceedings commenced before the criminal charge leading to debate over the interpretation of section 26 of the Criminal Code concerning property offences and the subsequent ability to prosecute.
SUMMARY:
Interpretation of section 26(2) of the Criminal Code and its application to the case at hand whether 'civil proceedings have been taken' refers to commenced or completed civil actions in relation to subsequent criminal charges
OUTCOMES:
Appeal allowed matter remitted to the Magistrates? Court for further action
RULED IN FAVOUR OF:
Crown/Appellant
PLAINTIFF/CLAIMANT
DEFENDANT:
DURATION (DAYS):
ISSUES:
RELEVANCE:
RULING:
RULING TYPE:
CASES CITED:
Join our pro membership and get all the details at your finger tips
Want to see full case details, including key arguments and claims? [Join Pro Membership] to unlock exclusive insights.
Discover the legal strategies and defenses used in this case. [Join Pro Membership] for full access.
How long did this legal battle last, and what key events happened? [Join Pro Membership] to find out.
Uncover the critical legal principles debated in this case. [Join Pro Membership] for in-depth analysis.
See why this case matters in Banking, Mortgages, and Financial Services. [Join Pro Membership] to explore its impact.
Find out the final judgment and its legal implications. [Join Pro Membership] to access the ruling.
Understand how this judicial ruling sets a precedent in law. [Join Pro Membership] for expert breakdowns.
See how past legal precedents influenced this case. [Join Pro Membership] to unlock the list.
Download Case Summary:
Explore:
EPHESIANS 6:16
PT Satria Tirtatama Energindo v. East Asia Company Limited and Bali Energy Limited
2016
RE: C (VARIATION OF ACCESS ORDER)
2015
In the Matter of IPOC Capital Partners Limited and others
2007
Hindsight law can make mistakes. Consider checking original case studies
Lyndon Raynor v. Edna Matthews
Edna Matthews was charged with stealing $44320 from her employer sparking both civil and criminal proceedings. Civil proceedings commenced before the criminal charge leading to debate over the interpretation of section 26 of the Criminal Code concerning property offences and the subsequent ability to prosecute.