Case Study: Shaw v. DPP - Criminal Law and Separation of Powers

This case study analyzes the case of Shaw v. Director of Public Prosecutions, focusing on the issues of public morals and the separation of powers. The case involved the publication of a booklet containing names and addresses of prostitutes, leading to charges of conspiracy to corrupt public morals. The paper discusses the difficulties arising from the court creating an offense not explicitly recognized by law, posing a challenge to the separation of powers. The analysis highlights the judiciary's role in creating legal precedents and the implications of such actions on legislative authority, referencing Regina v. Thomas. The conclusion emphasizes the core difficulty: the judiciary creating a new offense, thereby blurring the lines of power established within the legal system. The paper highlights the importance of understanding the balance between judicial power and legislative authority in criminal law.

Running head: CRIMINAL LAW
CRIMINAL LAW
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1CRIMINAL LAW
Introduction
In the case of Shaw v. Director of Public Prosecutions, House of Lords [1962] A.C. 2201
Shaw published a booklet which was considered to contain the names as well as addresses of the
prostitutes which indicated that such ladies were considered to be open to being contacted about
the sexual services that were provided by them. In addition to such it was also claimed by Shaw
that such booklet was intended to be published to help the trade of those prostitutes because such
were considered to be taken off the streets by some legislative change. Shaw had pleaded not
guilty for the charges, which were laid down on him for conspiracy in order to corrupt the public
morals, and living on the earnings related to prostitution and the publishing of various obscene
Article.
This particular paper would discuss the issues and the difficulties that took place in the
case and it would critically evaluate the problems in the decision relating to the separation of
power.
Discussion
This particular case dealt with the conviction of conspiracy that was relating to the public
morals and such charge was not considered to be recognized by law. Therefore, it posed a
difficulty as the legislation did not make any laws regarding such as they are considered to be the
law making body. On the other hand, as per the judgment which had been given the appeal was
dismissed but the conviction was considered to be upheld as the Court had found the decision of
the defendant dangerous to the welfare of the society and therefore, in order to adapt to the
changing standards and the morals and values of the society the offences could be created by the
1 Shaw v. Director of Public Prosecutions, House of Lords [1962] A.C. 220.

2CRIMINAL LAW
court2. Therefore, a new offence had been created relating to corruption of the public morals and
such had not been written in the criminal statute. Therefore, it could be used as a legal charge.
From the above judgment, it can be analyzed that according to the author, it had been
stated that such had posed a difficulty because the offence had been created by the court for
which the offender had to be penalized and the statutory power was considered to be through
legislation or the legislative law making authority. The offence was created by the judiciary and
for such a legal charge would also be given by the judiciary as the statute had not been
recognized as a legal charge. However, judiciary on the other hand had the authority to make
laws which would act as precedents therefore, such had been in accordance with their
authorities3. Therefore, this particular case posed as a difficulty in terms of separation of powers
because the judiciary functioned on behalf of the legislative authority. It can be understood from
the Regina v. Thomas: CCA 1957 [1956] 41 Cr App R 1174 where the woman was considered to
be a convicted prostitute and the case decided whether the accused was considered to living on
the earnings of the prostitution. The direction in this case was approved and the appeal was
considered to be rejected.
Conclusion
Thus, to conclude it can be stated that from the above discussion the case had posed a
difficulty in terms of separation of powers as the judiciary had created a new offence which was
not recognized by law or any statute.
2 Westerland, Chad L. "The Strategic Analysis of Judicial Behavior and the Separation of Powers." The Oxford
Handbook of US Judicial Behavior. New York: Oxford University Press, 2017.
3 Dworkin, Ronald. "Judicial discretion." The Rule of Law and the Separation of Powers. Routledge, 2017. 157-171.
4 Regina v. Thomas: CCA 1957 [1956] 41 Cr App R 117

3CRIMINAL LAW
Bibliography
Dworkin, Ronald. "Judicial discretion." The Rule of Law and the Separation of Powers.
Routledge, 2017. 157-171.
Regina v. Thomas: CCA 1957 [1956] 41 Cr App R 117.
Shaw v. Director of Public Prosecutions, House of Lords [1962] A.C. 220.
Westerland, Chad L. "The Strategic Analysis of Judicial Behavior and the Separation of
Powers." The Oxford Handbook of US Judicial Behavior. New York: Oxford University Press,
2017.