Kembaraxtra-Case Law- Conspiracy to Defraud: Public Duty-Case: Moses and Ansbro (1991) CA

Key Facts

• Parties: Moses (former employee) and Ansbro (employee) of the DHSS.
• Action: Agreed to obtain National Insurance numbers for immigrants not entitled to them.
• Issue: Whether this constituted conspiracy to defraud.

Legal Principle

• Ruling: Moses and Ansbro were found guilty of conspiracy to defraud.
• Per Jowitt J.: DHSS officers processing applications that should not have been processed were acting contrary to their public duty.

Definition of Conspiracy to Defraud (Public Sector)

• Source: Lord Diplock's dictum in Scott v Metropolitan Police Commissioner.
• Key Elements:

1. Intended Victim: A person performing public duties (not a private individual).
2. Purpose: To cause the public servant to act contrary to their public duty.
3. Means: The intended means of achieving this purpose must be dishonest.
4. Economic Loss: The purpose does not need to involve causing economic loss to anyone.

Application to the Case

• Moses and Ansbro's actions aimed to make DHSS officers process invalid applications.
• This caused the officers, in their public capacity, to act contrary to their duty.
• The means (obtaining numbers for ineligible individuals) were dishonest.
• The absence of economic loss was irrelevant, as per the Scott principle for public duty victims.