R v Grantham (1984) concerns jury directions regarding the dishonesty and intent to defraud.
Criminal law – Company law – Criminal procedure – Director – Fraudulent trading – Dishonest prejudice to creditors – Conviction – Jury directions – Court of Appeal – Appeal dismissed
In the case of R v Grantham (1984), the appellant was a consultant in charge of a company’s administration. As a result of committing fraudulent trading, he was convicted by the court. The latter sentenced the appellant to 15 months’ imprisonment. During the trial, the judge directed the jury regarding the dishonesty and intent to defraud.
The appellant appealed. He claimed that the trial judge misdirected the jury. In fact, it was for the prosecution to prove that there was no prospect of the creditors ever receiving payment of their debts.
Whether the judge rightly directed the jury regarding the matter of dishonesty and intent to defraud creditors?
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. It applied the House of Lord’s case Welham v DPP  AC 103 and held that there was no error in directing the jury regarding dishonesty and intent to defraud creditors. In the present case, the court also found that in order to establish fraud, intention or recklessness must be proved.
Applied: Welham v DPP  A.C. 103,  3 WLUK 120.