Blackmail Definition

GLOSSARY

What does Blackmail mean?

Blackmail is any unwarranted demand with menaces.

A person is guilty of blackmail if, with a view to gain for himself or another or with intent to cause loss to another, he makes any unwarranted demand with menaces; for this purpose a demand is unwarranted unless the maker has reasonable grounds for making it and the use of menaces is a proper means of reinforcing the demand. The nature of the act or omission demanded is immaterial, as is whether the menaces relate to action to be taken by the person making the demand: Theft Act 1968, s 21.

View the related practice notes about Blackmail

Blackmail

The offenceA person is guilty of blackmail if, with a view to gain for themselves or another or with intent to cause loss to another, they make any unwarranted demand with menaces. A demand with menaces is unwarranted unless the person making it does so in the belief that:•they have reasonable grounds for making the demand, and•the use of the menaces is a proper means of reinforcing the demandBlackmail is an indictable-only offence that can only be tried in the Crown Court.JurisdictionOne of the constituent elements of the offence must occur in England and Wales. A person will be guilty of the offence of blackmail whether or not they were in England and Wales at any material time and whether or not they are a British citizen.Jurisdiction is established if the communication of a demand were sent either: •from a place in England and Wales to a place elsewhere, or•from a place elsewhere to a place in England and WalesIn R v Pogmore, the Court of Appeal held that the...

Anonymisation—protecting the identity of a person—illustrative decisions

Anonymisation—protecting the identity of a person—illustrative decisions The tables below provide examples of cases in which applications for anonymity of a person in civil litigation proceedings under CPR 39.2(4) have been considered by the courts. For ease of reference they are divided up into successful and unsuccessful applications. For guidance on the general principles that the courts apply when faced with an application for anonymity, see Practice Note: Anonymisation—protecting the identity of a person. Examples of the court granting anonymity Case details and analysis Judgment date Summary of decision JWS v JZX [2024] EWHC 1345 (KB) 6 June 2024 This is an example of the court granting an order to anonymise the defendant (the claimant having already been granted anonymity) which involved the court balancing the defendant’s rights under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) against Article 10 (right to freedom of expression and the principle of open justice). The court considered that the ‘significant evidential documentary challenges to the Claimant's case’ tipped the balance in favour of the defendant’s...

Discover our 53 Practice Notes on Blackmail

If a husband has commenced divorce proceedings in Australia and the wife wishes to apply to the English court for financial provision in relation to property in the husband’s name in the UK can she issue proceedings immediately or only when the divorce proceedings in Australia have been concluded?

If a husband has commenced divorce proceedings in Australia and the wife wishes to apply to the English court for financial provision in relation to property in the husband’s name in the UK can she issue proceedings immediately or only when the divorce proceedings in Australia have been concluded? Part III of the Matrimonial and Family Proceedings Act 1984 (MFPA 1984) was enacted to ensure insofar as was possible that where a spouse had a connection with England and Wales, any hardship suffered through the application of foreign law on divorce could be ameliorated by enabling that spouse to bring proceedings here. As the Supreme Court put it in Agbaje v Agbaje, the legislative purpose is ‘the alleviation of the adverse consequences of no, or no adequate, financial provision being made by a foreign court where there were substantial connections with England’. The permission (leave) of the court is required before an application under the MFPA 1984 can be made. The court should not grant leave unless there is...

In employment proceedings, where the parties have waived without prejudice privilege, is the without prejudice communication itself admissible, or just the fact that there was a without prejudice communication?

In employment proceedings, where the parties have waived without prejudice privilege, is the without prejudice communication itself admissible, or just the fact that there was a without prejudice communication? Where parties communicate in a genuine effort to settle a dispute, that correspondence will be subject to without prejudice privilege, meaning that it will not be admissible into subsequent court proceedings (except, insofar as costs are concerned, that privilege is expressed to be save as to costs). Correspondence does not need to be marked as being without prejudice to attract the privilege (Chocoladefabriken Lindt v Nestle [1978] RPC 287 (not reported by ��Ӱ��®)), though whether the correspondence is treated as being open will depend upon its context. Likewise, simply marking a communication as being ‘without prejudice [save as to costs]’ does not confer privilege—the communication itself must amount to a genuine attempt to settle a dispute. The without prejudice shield can also be lost if it would be unjust for it to apply so as to protect unambiguous impropriety,...

See the 7 Q&As about Blackmail

Dispute Resolution weekly highlights—7 November 2024

This week's edition of Dispute Resolution weekly highlights includes: the 177th Practice Direction update and the Supreme Court decision in Lipton v BA Cityflyer (Brexit assimilated law); dates for your diary; details of our most recently published content; and other information of general interest to dispute resolution practitioners.

Corporate Crime weekly highlights—18 July 2024

This week's edition of Corporate Crime weekly highlights includes analysis of how the new UK government's legislative agenda will help tackle corruption and financial crime, of a Crown Court ruling that the SFO is not liable for legal fees incurred by an acquitted trader whose trial was delayed for more than a year due to disclosure issues and of a recent Court of Justice case which addressed the legality of the retention and access to personal data, specifically IP addresses, by public authorities for the purpose of combating copyright infringements online. Also included is news of the criminal justice and law enforcement announcements from the King’s Speech, of the third amendment to the Criminal Practice Directions 2023 and of the publication of the UK Anti-Corruption Coalition’s anti-corruption agenda for the new government. All this, and more, in this week’s Corporate Crime highlights.

Read the latest 103 News articles on Blackmail

Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.

Case studies

"Everything at Advocates is done on a timed basis, so we need to conduct our research efficiently. We don't want to charge clients unnecessarily or write off our time. With Lexis products, we can get more research done each day"

Advocates

Access all documents on Blackmail

GET ACCESS NOW

Top

Trial

��Ӱ��

GLOSSARY