R v Feely [1973]

Key Points To Note

• The court considered the role of the judge in defining dishonesty to the jury.

• The court held that it was unnecessary and undesirable for the judge to define dishonesty to the jury, suggesting an objective test for dishonesty.

2. Impact and Analysis:

• Legal Principle: The case established that the determination of dishonesty should be left to the jury's common sense and not rigidly defined by the judge.

• Implications: This approach aims to ensure fairness but can lead to uncertainty due to the subjective nature of what may be considered dishonest.