Good criminal solicitors will be aware that the concept of Dishonesty is one of the central foundations of many offences in English Law.
For over 30 years the approach to the concept of dishonesty was determined by the guidance in R v Ghosh  QB 1053 . In 2017, in the case of Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) (trading as Cockfords Club)  UKSC 67, the Supreme Court gave the opinion that Ghosh may have been wrong and why and that in future the courts should adopt the approach taken in Ivey. In the appeal case of David Barton & Rosemary Booth  EWCA Crim 576, the Court of Appeal confirmed the position in a binding judgement that the position in Ivey was the correct approach.
In Ghosh, the test for determining dishonesty was stated to be:
“... a jury must first of all decide whether according to the ordinary standards of reasonable and honest people what was done was dishonest. If it was not dishonest by those standards that is the end of the matter and the prosecution fails.
If it was dishonest by those standards then the jury must consider whether the defendant himself must have realised that what he was doing was by those standards dishonest. …”
This can be summarised as a two-fold test:
The Court of Appeal rejected this in Ivey and proposed an alternative two-stage test: