R v Saik (Appellant) (On Appeal from the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division))

The case of R v Saik (Appellant) (On Appeal from the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)) involved an appeal against a conviction for conspiracy to launder money. The appellant, Mr Abdulrahman Saik, operated a bureau de change in London and pleaded guilty to the charge of conspiracy, subject to the qualification that he did not know the money was the proceeds of crime but only suspected this was so. The central issue before the House of Lords was whether the offence to which the appellant pleaded guilty in this qualified way was an offence known to law. The statutory offence of conspiracy, as defined by section 1(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1977, requires an agreement to pursue a course of conduct that would necessarily amount to or involve the commission of an offence. Section 1(2) further specifies that for a person to be guilty of conspiracy, they must intend or know that a fact or circumstance necessary for the commission of the offence shall or will exist. The court had to determine if the appellant's state of mind, which was based on suspicion rather than knowledge, met the requirements of the statute. The House of Lords concluded that the appellant's conviction could not stand as suspicion was not sufficient in respect of a fact to which section 1(2) applied. The court held that knowledge or intention regarding the provenance of the property must be proved or admitted. The appeal was allowed, and the conviction was set aside.