The test of whether the defence conducted on behalf of the defendant, was so incompetent that his trial could not be described as fair, may now, because of the Human Rights Convention be less than the ‘flagrant incompetence’ formerly required. If the incompetence did reach such a level as to have denied him a fair trial, then his right might have been reached. The case before the court involving various allegations was not such as to make the trial not fair, and in this case there was no need to decide in detail what that standard might be.
The provisions of the Human Rights Act may have made inappropriate the old standard for judging the need for a retrial in a criminal matter where incompetence was alleged against counsel, but the case before the court involving various allegations was not such as to make the trial not fair, and in this case there was no need to decide in detail what that standard might be.
Citations:
Times 09-Jan-2001, Gazette 23-Nov-2000
Legal Professions, Criminal Practice, Human Rights
Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.87411