The Attorney-General sought to refer a sentence to the Court of Appeal as too lenient.
Held: The Act introduced a new power, but provided several protections. The Attorney-General had himself to consider the sentence to be too lenient, and he exercised a discretion, not a duty, to refer the case. The Court of Appeal was to be asked to give leave to refer the case, and itself consider whether it was too lenient. The Court of Appeal’s leave should not be considered to be automatic. Here the reference was misconceived, mentioning elements which should not have been included, and excluding matters of mitigation which should have been mentioned. The Attorney-General had exercised his discretion under a mistake. Leave was refused.
Kay LJ, Goldring, Cox JJ
Times 18-Apr-2003, Gazette 19-Jun-2003
Criminal Law Act 1977 1
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Attorney-General’s Reference (No 10 of 2003); Regina v Jutue CACD 14-May-2003
A case had been referred to the court, but the court was unhappy about the state of the reference. It was essential that reference should be seen by counsel in the case so that he could check it. It should not be based upon the evidence as it stood . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 23 June 2021; Ref: scu.180848
