The UK Supreme Court took the opportunity in Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd t/a Crockfords [2017] UKSC 67 to reverse the long-standing, but unpopular, test for dishonesty in R v Ghosh. It reduced the relevance of subjectivity in the test of dishonesty, and brought the civil and the criminal law approaches to dishonesty into line by adopting the test as laid down in Royal Brunei Airlines Sdn Bhd v Tan. This paper employs extensive legal historical research to demonstrate that the Supreme Court in Ivey was too quick to dismiss the significance of the historical roots of dishonesty. Through an innovative and comprehensive historical framework of fraud, this paper demonstrates that dishonesty has long been a central pillar of the actus reus of deceptive offences. The recognition of such significance permits us to situate the role of dishonesty in contemporary criminal property offences. This historical analysis further demonstrates that the Justices erroneously overlooked centuries of jurisprudence in their haste to unite civil and criminal law tests for dishonesty.

中文翻译：

---

诚实的作弊：Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd t/a Crockfords [2017] UKSC 67 后作弊和欺诈的及时历史

英国最高法院借此机会Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd t/a Crockfords[2017] UKSC 67 扭转长期存在但不受欢迎的不诚实测试R诉戈什. 它减少了不诚实测试中主观性的相关性，并通过采用《文莱皇家航空私人有限公司诉 Tan。本文采用广泛的法律历史研究来证明最高法院在艾维太快忽视了不诚实的历史根源的重要性。通过创新和全面的欺诈历史框架，本文表明，不诚实长期以来一直是欺诈的核心支柱。犯罪行为的欺骗性罪行。对这种重要性的认识使我们能够确定不诚实在当代刑事财产犯罪中的作用。这一历史分析进一步表明，大法官们错误地忽视了几个世纪以来的法理学，匆忙将民法和刑法的不诚实测试结合起来。