In R v Barton & Booth, a five member Court of Criminal Appeal: 1) emphatically endorsed the Ivey test for dishonesty, firmly dismissing the previous two-stage test in Ghosh; 2) affirmed that, in relation to conspiracy to defraud, there needed to be no requirement of an “aggravating feature” over and above a dishonest agreement which includes some unlawfulness in its object or means; and 3) rejected the suggestion that conspiracy to defraud, when properly particularised, falls foul of Article 7 of the ECHR.

We examine some of the implications of the decision, particularly in relation to corporate fraud and the effect on companies, small and large, including financial institutions.