Category: Criminal Practice

Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department Ex Parte Hickey and Others, Same Ex Parte Bamber; Same Ex Parte Malone (No 2): QBD 29 Nov 1994

The Home Secretary is obliged to disclose new evidence to a defendant before rejecting his application for a reference to Court of Appeal. The Home Secretary’s powers to refer a case back to the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) was an integral part of the just functioning of the overall process of criminal justice. A decision maker may treat submissions about the decision differently if they are only allowed after it has been made when ‘it is difficult to suppose that [a decision maker] can remain as open-minded as if no clear decision has been taken’ and ‘The guiding principle should always be that sufficient disclosure should be given to enable the petitioner properly to present his best case.’

Judges:

Simon Brown LJ

Citations:

Independent 29-Nov-1994, Times 02-Dec-1994, [1995] 1 WLR 734

Statutes:

Criminal Appeal Act 1968 17

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Approved – Regina v Parole Board and Another ex parte Wilson CA 6-May-1992
It was natural justice to allow a discretionary lifer to see the reports which had been prepared for consideration on his application for release on licence. W had been sentenced to life imprisonment for buggery, and was a discretionary life . .

Cited by:

Cited – Secretary of State for the Home Department v SP CA 21-Dec-2004
The applcant, a girl aged 17 was in a young offender institution. She complained that she had been removed to segregation without first giving her chance to be heard. The respondent argued that there were sufficient post decision safeguards to . .
Cited – Roberts v Parole Board HL 7-Jul-2005
Balancing Rights of Prisoner and Society
The appellant had been convicted of the murder of three police officers in 1966. His tariff of thirty years had now long expired. He complained that material put before the Parole Board reviewing has case had not been disclosed to him.
Held: . .
See Also – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex Parte Bamber CA 15-Feb-1996
The right of a prisoner to provide a recorded message for a radio station could properly be curtailed. . .
See Also – Bamber v United Kingdom ECHR 11-Sep-1997
The Commission declared inadmissible a complaint that Standing Order 5 G 2B infringed Article 10. The Order precluded prisoners from contacting the media by telephone except in exceptional circumstances. The Standing Order satisfied the requirement . .
See Also – Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department (ex parte Bamber) Admn 24-Apr-1998
The applicant was refused leave to apply for judicial review of a decision as to his release made on the basis of his refusal to accept his guilt. . .
See Also – Bamber v Regina CACD 12-Dec-2002
. .
See Also – Bamber, Regina v CACD 14-May-2009
The defendant had been convicted in 1986 of the murder of five members of his adoptive family. The judge had initially recommended a minimum term of 25 years. A later judge had suggested a whole life term. The convictions had been upheld in 2002. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Administrative, Prisons

Updated: 26 May 2022; Ref: scu.87750

Regina v Derby and South Derbyshire Magistrate’s Court, ex parte Leandro Pitzettu: Admn 13 Mar 1997

The defendant faced a charge of driving with excess alcohol. His solicitors indicated he would plead guilty, and sought disclosure of police material which they anticipated would support his application for special reasons for not disqualifying him, namely that he had driven only a very short distance. They now appealed a refusal to order CPS to disclose such material. It was held that, in a summary case there was indeed no such power.

Citations:

HC Admin 260

Links:

Bailii

Criminal Practice, Magistrates

Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.137205

Regina v Jennings, Regina v Johnson, Regina v Mullins: CACD 6 Sep 1993

No appeal lies against a Crown Court decision not to sever an indictment at a preparatory hearing. As an interlocutory order no appeal lay.

Citations:

Ind Summary 18-Oct-1993, Ind Summary 06-Sep-1993, Times 29-Oct-1993, (1993) 98 Cr App R 308

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1987 7(1) 9(11)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – In re Gunawardena, Harbutt and Banks CACD 1990
The defendant applied to stay the proceedings on the grounds that they were an abuse of process.
Held: The application for leave to appeal was rejected. The application to stay was not within the ambit of the preparatory hearing and therefore . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Claydon; Regina v Regina v Hall; Regina v Costall; Regina v French CACD 13-Jun-2001
The defendants faced substantial trials involving drugs offences. At a preparatory hearing the court made decisions about abuse of process and as to what evidence might be admitted. The prosecutor said there was no right of appeal.
Held: . .
Cited – H, Regina v (Interlocutory application: Disclosure) HL 28-Feb-2007
The trial judge had refused an order requested at a preparatory hearing by the defence for the disclosure of documents held by the prosecutor. The House was now asked whether a right of appeal existed against such a refusal.
Held: The practice . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.86995

Regina v Setz-Dempsey and Another: CACD 24 Jun 1993

Mental illness is included in the meaning ‘Unfit to attend as a witness’. The admission of statements under s25 quite different from s26 Criminal Justice Act 1988.

Citations:

Times 20-Jul-1993, Independent 24-Jun-1993

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1988 23(2) 25 26

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Evidence, Criminal Practice

Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.88003

E v London Borough of Islington: Admn 25 Feb 1997

Judges:

Popplewelll J

Citations:

[1997] EWHC Admin 180

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Coventry Justices Ex Parte Bullard and Another QBD 15-Apr-1992
Computer based evidence, which says what would have been said by the person making the record, remains hearsay, and is inadmissible without statutory provision otherwise. There is no exception for summary civil proceedings for the collection of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating, Criminal Practice

Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.137125

Regina v Highbury Corner Magistrates’ Court ex parte O’Donoghue: Admn 12 Feb 1997

The defendant sought judicial review of the District Judge’s decision. He was accused of rape. The judge directed that the case be adjourned to a particular date. CPS represented that they would not be able to prepare the case for that date, but were ordered to do so. On the day CPS failed to attend, saying that the case was not ready, requesting a further adjournment. Contrary to the court’s order thet had not required the complainant to attend on the day.
Held: The Crown Prosecution Service was entirely wrong to substitute its own crown prosecutors’ code in place of a clear court order.

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill LCJ, Moses J

Citations:

Times 24-Feb-1997, [1997] EWHC Admin 132

Links:

Bailii

Criminal Practice

Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.137077

Regina v Commissioner of Metropolitan Police ex parte Thompson: Admn 18 Dec 1996

When considering an application for judicial review, where a defendant had been cautioned by the police, it was necessary to recognise that the caution procedure did have legal consequences. Though ‘There is no statutory basis for the formal caution. As is well known, the phrase ‘formal caution’ in this context is used to describe a discretionary procedure adopted by the police.’
Schliemann LJ: ‘A formal caution is not something to be regarded lightly. Records are kept of the administering of cautions . . . Such a caution, while carrying no immediately disagreeable consequence for the recipient, has potential adverse consequences for him should he be accused of offending on a future occasion. He is more likely then to be prosecuted for that offence and he will not be able to claim a good character before the trial court. If convicted, the existence of a prior formal caution may affect his sentence. Formal cautions are usually cited after any conviction of a juvenile. In practice they are rarely cited in the cases of adult offenders but may be referred to if they are relevant to the crime under consideration’. And
‘So far as the jurisdiction of this court is concerned, it is common ground that judicial review is available as a remedy in respect of a caution; that this court will not invariably interfere, even in the case of a clear breach of the guidelines relating to the administration of cautions, as the availability of a remedy is a matter for the discretion of the court; that police officers responsible for applying the Home Office Circular which sets out the guidelines ‘must enjoy a wide margin of appreciation as to the nature of the case and whether the preconditions for a caution are satisfied;’ and that it will be a rare case where a person who has been cautioned will succeed in showing that the decision was fatally flawed by a clear breach of the Guidelines. That much is clear from a decision of this court, R. v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis, Ex parte P. (1995) 160 J.P. 367′.

Judges:

Schiemann LJ, Butterfield J

Citations:

[1996] EWHC Admin 379, [1997] 1 WLR 1519

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis, Ex parte P QBD 1995
A court may set aside a police caution where the defendant had not made a clear admission of guilt. Simon Brown LJ: ‘It follows, in my judgment, that there was here no clear and reliable admission of guilt at any stage. I am invited to look at the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Wyman, Regina (on the Application of) v The Chief Constable of Hampshire Constaulary Admn 24-Jul-2006
The claimant challenged a formal caution administered against him for an alleged sexual assault. He denied that he had made any clear admission of the offence.
Held: The requirement under the procedure was for a clear admission of guilt, but . .
Cited – Stratton, Regina (on The Application of) v Thames Valley Police Admn 7-Jun-2013
The claimant requested the court to set aside a caution accepted by her, when she said that she had not understood the serious consequences and had not admitted the offence.
Held: It was for each Chief Constable to draft his own policy, but . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Judicial Review

Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.136927

Regina v Manchester Stipendiary City Magistrates ex parte Pal Tagger: Admn 29 Nov 1996

The defendant appealed his conviction for illegal entry. He complained that after first being proceeded against for illegal working, it was an abuse now to pursue this prosecution.
Held: No abuse had been established, only delay.

Judges:

Staughton LJ, Tucker J

Citations:

[1996] EWHC Admin 300

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Immigration Act 1993 6

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Horseferry Road Magistrates’ Court, ex Parte Bennett (No 1) HL 24-Jun-1993
The defendant had been brought to the UK in a manner which was in breach of extradition law. He had, in effect, been kidnapped by the authorities.
Held: The High Court may look at how an accused person was brought within the jurisdiction when . .
Cited – Regina v Croydon Justices Ex Parte Dean QBD 9-Mar-1993
The applicant a 17 year old assisted the police in a murder investigation on the understanding, induced by the police, that he would not himself be prosecuted. Some weeks later, at the instance of the CPS, the applicant was charged with a lesser . .
Cited – Regina v Derby Magistrates Court, ex parte Brooks 1993
Looking at the court’s power to halt a prosecution as an abuse of process, the court said: ‘The power to stop a prosecution arises only when it is an abuse of a process of the court. It may be an abuse of process if either (a) the prosecution have . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Criminal Practice

Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.136848

Regina v Liverpool Stipendiary Magistrate ex parte Santos: Admn 15 Nov 1996

A solicitor’s mistake as to the return date on a bail notice was capable of being a reasonable cause for a defendant’s non-attendance at court to answer bail. The answer will be different in each case.

Citations:

Times 23-Jan-1997, [1996] EWHC Admin 235

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Bail Act 1976 6(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Magistrates, Criminal Practice

Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.136783

Wayne Swan v Vehicle Inspectorate: Admn 11 Nov 1996

The Time limit for commencing a prosecution doesn’t begin to run until a person authorised to prosecute is told of the circumstances. A traffic examiner, not authorised to take a decision to prosecute could not be the ‘prosecutor’ under section 6 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988.

Citations:

Gazette 15-Jan-1997, Times 11-Dec-1996, [1996] EWHC Admin 219

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 6(1)

Cited by:

Cited – Donnachie, Regina (on the Application of) v Cardiff Magistrates’ Court Admn 27-Jul-2007
The defendant appealed refusal of the district judge to state a case on the basis of having no jurisdiction.
Held: Where the magistrate is acting not as an Examining Magistrate, but is deciding a preliminary issue as to jurisdiction, his . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Road Traffic

Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.136767

Regina v Liverpool Crown Court ex parte Robert Moss: Admn 13 Nov 1996

The defendant appealed his conviction saying the prosecution had failed to disclose an additional earlier and contradictory statement of a central prosecution witness.
Held: The statement was of a witness whose evidence had been relied upon by the court and was startlingly different. The applicant having served his sentnce it would be wrong to order a retrial. Certiorari granted.

Citations:

[1996] EWHC Admin 223

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1988 38

Criminal Practice

Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.136771

Regina v Horseferry Road Magistrates’ Court ex parte Director of Public Prosecutions (Case of Okiya): Admn 30 Oct 1996

The court considered what were the circumstances under which the Divisional Court should exercise its discretion to quash the decision of the magistrates to assume jurisdiction rather than to commit a case for trial.

Citations:

[1996] EWHC Admin 172

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Stamford Magistrates ex parte Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 31-Jul-1997
A challenge was made as to whether the magistrates had jurisdiction in an allegation of burglary, or whether the case should have been committed to the Crown Court. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Magistrates

Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.136720

Regina v Bow Street Magistrates ex parte Kazuhiro Sakashita and Takumi Hashimoto: Admn 15 Oct 1996

Citations:

[1996] EWHC Admin 110

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Bow St Stipendiary Magistrate Ex Parte South Coast Shipping and Others QBD 18-Nov-1992
A private prosecution was allowed after the Director of Public Prosecutions decided not to prosecute in the case of the deaths in the sinking of the Bowbelle Marchioness. Lloyd LJ discussed what would amount to abuse of process: ‘Manipulation or . .
Cited – Regina v Brentford Justices Ex parte Wong QBD 1981
The defendant had been involved in a traffic accident. Very shortly before the expiry of the six month time limit, the prosecutor issued a careless driving summons apparently in order to preserve the possibility of a prosecution without yet having . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Magistrates, Criminal Practice

Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.136658

Regina v Middlesex Quarter Sessions, ex parte Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 1952

The court considered a trial on indictment where there was jurisdiction to try the offence charged. After pleas had been taken and counsel for the Crown had opened the prosecution case to the jury, the chairman intervened and directed the jury to return a verdict of not guilty.
Held: It was not for the judge to express a view to the jury that a Woolwich jury would not convict on the evidence. However, even an egregiously wrong directed verdict of not guilty could not be disturbed, and certiorari will not be granted to quash a verdict of not guilty of a criminal charge.

Judges:

Lord Goddard CJ

Citations:

[1952] 2 QB 758

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Attorney General’s Reference (No 2 of 2000) CACD 23-Nov-2000
The defendant had faced a charge of possessing an offensive weapon, namely a rice flail. The judge invited the prosecution to reconsider the case before it started, but the case went ahead. After the jury was empanelled, but before the prosecutor . .
Cited – Regina v SH CACD 3-Aug-2010
The prosecutor had appealed immediately against the judge’s withdrawal of a charge of racially aggravated use of insulting words or behaviour. The judge then ignored his obligation to continue the trial without mentioning the issue to the jury. He . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 25 May 2022; Ref: scu.238126

Regina v Davis, Rowe, Johnson: CACD 17 Jul 2000

The court made a distinction between convictions found on appeal to be unfair, and those found to be unsafe. The prosecution had not disclosed to the defendants that the source of their information was a police informer. The European Court of Human Rights had found the procedure unfair. The national court must therefore discharge the defendants, but could not say they felt the defendants’ innocence had been established. The system of public interest immunity certificates had not itself been criticised by the European Court of Human Rights, and the system stood valid. Assessing the claim for a certificate in chambers would not deprive the applicant of his remedy. ‘The court is concerned with the safety of the conviction. A conviction can never be safe if there is a doubt about guilt. However, the converse is not true. A conviction may be unsafe even where there is no doubt about guilt but the trial process has been ‘vitiated by serious unfairness or significant legal misdirection’ as in Smith (Patrick and Others) and in Weir. Usually it will be sufficient for the court to apply the test in Stirland.’ and ‘Assuming the wrong decision on law or the irregularity had not occurred and the trial had been free from legal error, would the only reasonable and proper verdict have been one of guilty?’

Judges:

Mantell LJ, Blofeld, Rafferty JJ

Citations:

Times 25-Jul-2000, Times 24-Apr-2000, [2001] 1 Cr App Rep 8, [2000] Crim LR 1012, [2000] UKHRR 683, [2000] HRLR 527, [2000] EWCA Crim 109

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Stirland v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 1944
The House considered what was the appropriate test for allowing a conviction to stand despite the finding of an irregularity in the trial.
Held: The House must be satisfied that there was ‘a situation a reasonable jury, after being properly . .
See Also – Regina v Davis; Regina v Rowe; Regina v Johnson CA 10-Mar-1993
Guidance was given on the procedures to be followed for applications for non-disclosure for public interest immunity. The court identified three types of case. In the first, and most frequent case the prosecution must notify the defence of the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Kelleher, Regina v CACD 20-Nov-2003
The defendant, out of strong conviction, entered an art gallery and knocked the head from a statue of Margaret Thatcher.
Held: The court examined the breadth of the defence of ‘lawful excuse’ to a charge of criminal damage, and whether a court . .
Cited – Gough, Regina v CACD 8-Nov-2001
Appeal against conviction for burglary: ‘The appeal is concerned only with the directions given to the jury as to the inferences which they might draw after the appellant absconded during the course of his trial.’
Held: The direction was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Human Rights, Criminal Evidence, Crime

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.135722

Regina v John Spear, Philip Hastie and David Morton Boyd: CMAC 15 Jan 2001

The fact that the President of a Court Martial was appointed within the same authority as was prosecuting, did not necessarily mean that the tribunal was not impartial. Such officers were typically appointed at the end of their careers, and they were appointed for a fixed term. There was no history of them being removed, and the circumstances were impartial. The test was not some neurotic distrust, but rather the absence of any appearance of bias on a reasonable view. The system met that standard.

Citations:

Gazette 22-Mar-2001, Times 30-Jan-2001, [2001] EWCA Crim 1751

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Human Rights Act 1998

Citing:

Appealed to – Regina v Boyd, Hastie, Spear (Courts Martial Appeal Court), Regina v Saunby, Clarkson, English, Williams, Dodds, and others HL 18-Jul-2002
Corts Martial System Complant with Human Rights
The applicants were each convicted by courts martial of offences under civil law. They claimed that the courts martial were not independent tribunals because of the position of the president of the court, and that it was wrong to try a serviceman by . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina v Boyd, Hastie, Spear (Courts Martial Appeal Court), Regina v Saunby, Clarkson, English, Williams, Dodds, and others HL 18-Jul-2002
Corts Martial System Complant with Human Rights
The applicants were each convicted by courts martial of offences under civil law. They claimed that the courts martial were not independent tribunals because of the position of the president of the court, and that it was wrong to try a serviceman by . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Human Rights, Armed Forces

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.135616

Regina v Feltham Magistrate’s Court, ex Parte Ebrahim, Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 21 Feb 2001

The court considered how cases should be handled where video evidence of relevance to a defendant’s case had been destroyed, and the defendant asserted abuse of process.
Held: The discretion to stay proceedings should be employed only in exceptional circumstances. Two categories applied: where the defendant could no longer receive a fair trial, and where it would be unfair to try the defendant. The defence should notify the prosecution at an early stage if any such evidence was required to be preserved.
Brooke LJ pointed out that a judgment of the fairness of proceeding applied both to the prosecution and the defence. As to the assessment of fairness where relevant evidence was missing he said: ‘It must be remembered that it is a commonplace in criminal trials for a defendant to rely on ‘holes’ in the prosecution case, for example, a failure to take fingerprints or a failure to submit evidential material to forensic examination. If, in such a case, there is sufficient credible evidence, apart from the missing evidence, which, if believed, would justify a conviction, then a trial should proceed, leaving the defendant to seek to persuade the jury or justices not to convict because evidence which might otherwise have been available was not before the court through no fault of his. Often the absence of a video film or fingerprints or DNA material is likely to hamper the prosecution as much as the defence.’

Judges:

Mr Justice Morison Lord Justice Brooke

Citations:

Times 27-Feb-2001, [2001] 1 WLR 1293, [2001] 2 Cr App R 23, [2001] EWHC Admin 130, [2002] RTR 7, [2001] 1 All ER 831, [2001] Crim LR 741

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Parker CACD 30-Jan-2003
The defendant appealed a conviction for causing criminal damage by fire with risk to life. The evidence was that no explanation existed other than that the fire had been started deliberately. She said she had been trying to light a cigarette in bed. . .
Cited – Phipps, Regina v CACD 14-Jan-2005
The appellant had been convicted of driving with excess alcohol. After complaints by the injured victim’s family he was further prosecuted for dangerous driving. He now appealed his conviction, having pleaded guilty when the judge failed to find an . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Wood; Director of Public Prosecutions v McGillicuddy Admn 19-Jan-2006
Each defendant sought disclosure of materials concerning the intoximeter instruments, having been charged with driving with excess alcohol. The defendants said that the meters were inaccurate and that the manufacturers were in effect part of the . .
Cited – Ali, Altaf v Crown Prosecution Service, West Midlands CACD 22-Mar-2007
The defendant was first arrested in 1997, but only re-arrested in 2004. He complained that the delay affected his right to a fair trial within a proper time. The judge accepted this but the trial proceeded, the judge denying a claim of abuse of . .
Cited – Taylor v Regina CACD 20-Dec-2013
The defendant appealed against his conviction, for sex offences some 33 years earlier, saying that the convictions had been unfairly obtained. Evidence had been available since 1980, but a decision not to prosecute had been taken.
Held: ‘the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence, Criminal Practice

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.135561

Raymond Christopher Betts, John Anthony Hall v Regina: CACD 9 Feb 2001

The defendants appealed convictions for causing grievous bodily harm. During interviw, the solicitor had advised that since the police had failed to make proper disclosure of the evidence, his client should not answer. He now appealed complaining of the judge’s direction as to the the conclusions to be drawn by the jury from his silence.
Held: S34 must now be interpreted in the light of the 1998 Act. An appropriate balance has been drawn between the exercise by an accused of his right to silence and the fair drawing of an adverse inference. Where an appellant had received legal advice not to answer questions, it was the genuineness of the decision which is relevant and not its quality. The jury had to determine whether or not the real reason for the appellant’s silence was because of the legal advice that he or she had received or was in truth that they had no or no adequate explanation to give to the case against them.

Judges:

Lord Justice Kay, Mr Justice Penry-Davey, And The Judge Advocate General

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Crim 224, [2001] 2 Crim App R 16

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1984 34, Human Rights Act 1998 3

Citing:

Cited – Condron v The United Kingdom ECHR 2-May-2000
A direction to a jury about an accused person’s silence during police questioning was inadequate to protect the right to a fair trial. The applicants had been advised by their solicitor to remain silent during interview because they were withdrawing . .
Cited – Regina v Cowan and Another CACD 12-Oct-1995
Detailed directions were provided for the judge to give to a jury where a defendant chooses not to give evidence in his defence in the Crown Court.
Lord Taylor of Gosforth said: ‘1. The judge will have told the jury that the burden of proof . .
Cited – Regina v Condron, Condron CACD 17-Oct-1996
The defendants were charged with the supply of heroin. They had declined to answer police questions and it was on the record that their solicitor had advised them not to do so, on the grounds that he considered them unfit because they were . .
Cited – Regina v Lester and Harvey CACD 13-Dec-1982
ThepProsecution relied entirely upon the evidence of an accomplice, Solomon. Lester and Harvey were convicted. A third man was acquitted. The Court referred to how the trial judge left the case to the jury and quoted from the summing up: ‘Members of . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v McCartney, Hamlett, Beddow and Hulme CACD 16-May-2003
The defendants appealed convictions and sentences for a long series of armed robberies. The evidence centred on the admissions of a participant, whose statement, the defendants alleged was self serving and unreliable, and in one case served a . .
Cited – Benn and Benn v Regina CA 30-Jul-2004
The defendants appealed against convictions for importing drugs. The evidence was circumstantial, including evidence of contamination of paper money with cocaine. New evidnce suggested the original forensic techniques had returned many false . .
Cited – Regina v Hoare and Pierce CACD 2-Apr-2004
The court considered the drawing of adverse inferences form an accused’s silence in the police station when this was under legal advice: ‘The question in the end, it is for the jury, is whether regardless of advice, genuinely given and genuinely . .
Cited – Beckles, Regina v CACD 12-Nov-2004
The appellant had been convicted in 1997 of robbery and false imprisonment. His case was now refererred by the Criminal Cases Review Commission. The defendant had, on advice from his solicitor refused to answer questions at the police station. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Human Rights

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.135580

Regina v Brown (Winston): HL 20 Feb 1997

The victim had been stabbed outside a nightclub. Two witnesses identified the defendant. The defendants complained that evidence had not been disclosed to them.
Held: There is no duty at common law on the prosecution to warn the defence of material which might be used to attack the credibility of defence witnesses. Fairness, so far as the preparation of the defence case and the selection of the defence witnesses are concerned, is preserved by the existing rules of disclosure and by ensuring that the defendant has adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence. ‘The preparation of the defence case is not complete until this has been done. Once it has been completed, the defence can be assumed to be in possession of all that is needed to decide which witnesses to lead and which to reject on grounds of credibility. It is unnecessary to extend the duty of disclosure by the prosecutor any further to ensure that the defendant has a fair trial.’ but ‘If fairness demands disclosure, then a way of ensuring that disclosure will be made must be found.’ (Lord Hope of Craighead )

Judges:

Lord Goff of Chieveley, Lord Slynn of Hadley Lord Hope of Craighead Lord Clyde Lord Hutton

Citations:

Gazette 03-Sep-1997, [1997] UKHL 33, [1998] AC 367, [1997] 3 All ER 769, [1997] 3 WLR 447, [1998] 1 Cr App Rep 66

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Dallison v Caffery CACD 1965
It is for the detaining authority to justify all periods of detention.
The court described the common law duty on a prosecutor to disclose material. Lord Denning MR said: ‘The duty of a prosecuting counsel or solicitor, as I have always . .
Outdated – Attorney-General’s Guidelines Practice Note (Criminal Evidence: Unused Material) 1982
. .
Cited – Regina v Keane CACD 15-Mar-1994
Public Interest Immunity Certificates for the protection of informants must be used only carefully. The Crown must specify the purpose of the public interest immunity certificate. The principles on disclosure in Ward are not limited to scientific . .
Cited – Rex v Bryant and Dickson CCA 1946
A fraud occurred in respect of the repairing of ambulances in a garage operated by a company in which the defendant Dickson was the major shareholder and where the defendant Bryant worked. An employee of the company at the garage would make an . .
Cited – Regina v Hennessy (Timothy) 1978
The court described the duty on a prosecutor to disclose evidence: ‘those who prepare and conduct prosecutions owe a duty to the courts to ensure that all relevant evidence of help to an accused is either led by them or made available to the . .
Cited – Regina v Ward (Judith) CACD 15-Jul-1992
The defendant had been wrongly convicted of IRA bombings. She said that the prosecution had failed to disclose evidence.
Held: The prosecution’s forensic scientists are under a common law duty to disclose to the defence anything they may . .
Cited – Regina v Williams (Michael) CACD 15-Apr-1994
It was argued that wherever the Crown have, as a result of their investigation of the contents of a notice of alibi, found material which goes to disprove the alibi, they must call it as part of the prosecution case.
Held: The court rejected . .
Approved – Regina v Seymour CACD 19-Dec-1995
A material irregularity had occurred because the prosecution had failed to disclose to the defence that they were in possession of a statement signed by a defence witness as to alibi which was used to cross-examine her when she gave evidence.

Cited by:

Cited – Taylor and Others v Director of The Serious Fraud Office and Others HL 29-Oct-1998
The defendant had requested the Isle of Man authorities to investigate the part if any taken by the plaintiff in a major fraud. No charges were brought against the plaintiff, but the documents showing suspicion came to be disclosed in the later . .
Cited – Regina v Mills, Regina v Poole HL 24-Jul-1997
The prosecution have a duty to disclose to the defence the statement of an adverse witness and not just to provide the name and address, even though that person was not seen as credible witness by the prosecution. ‘the rule in Bryant and Dickson is . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Wood; Director of Public Prosecutions v McGillicuddy Admn 19-Jan-2006
Each defendant sought disclosure of materials concerning the intoximeter instruments, having been charged with driving with excess alcohol. The defendants said that the meters were inaccurate and that the manufacturers were in effect part of the . .
Cited – H, Regina v (Interlocutory application: Disclosure) HL 28-Feb-2007
The trial judge had refused an order requested at a preparatory hearing by the defence for the disclosure of documents held by the prosecutor. The House was now asked whether a right of appeal existed against such a refusal.
Held: The practice . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.135211

Regina v Chief Constable of The Royal Ulster Constabulary Ex Parte Begley; Regina v McWilliams: HL 24 Jul 1997

There is no right at common law to have a solicitor present during a police interview. There was no infringement of the suspect’s human rights by the Northern Ireland Rules. The House discussed its ability to take the law forward: ‘It is true that the House has a power to develop the law. But it is a limited power. And it can be exercised only in the gaps left by Parliament. It is impermissible for the House to develop the law in a direction which is contrary to the expressed will of Parliament.’

Judges:

Lord Browne-Wilkinson

Citations:

Gazette 05-Nov-1997, Times 20-Oct-1997, [1997] NI 278, [1997] UKHL 39, [1997] 4 All ER 833, [1997] 1 WLR 1475

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Evidence (Northern Ireland) Order 1989 (1989 no 134)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Cullen v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary (Northern Ireland) HL 10-Jul-2003
The claimant had been arrested. He had been refused access to a solicitor whilst detaiined, but, in breach of statutory duty, he had not been given reasons as to why access was denied. He sought damages for that failure.
Held: If damages were . .
Cited – In re McKerr (Northern Ireland) HL 11-Mar-2004
The deceased had been shot by soldiers of the British Army whilst in a car in Northern Ireland. The car was alleged to have ‘run’ a checkpoint. The claimants said the investigation, now 20 years ago, had been inadequate. The claim was brought under . .
Cited – Alexander Von Starck v The Queen PC 28-Feb-2000
(Jamaica) The defendant had fatally stabbed a woman. On arrest, he admitted killing her and that he had the knife which he had used to do so. He gave the police officer a pouch containing a knife, on which blood of the same group as that of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Police, Northern Ireland, Human Rights

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.135212

Regina v Manchester Stipendiary Magistrate and The Lord Advocate Ex Parte Granada Television Ltd (On Appeal From A Divisional Court Of The Queen’s Bench Division): HL 28 Oct 1999

A Scottish search warrant properly issued and which was to be executed in England could be validly endorsed by an English court for execution in England. Earlier legislation was not superseded by the Police and Criminal Evidence Act which restricted certain warrants where the material to be sought out might be protected by forms of privilege.

Judges:

Lord Browne-Wilkinson, Lord Cooke of Thorndon, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Saville of Newdigate, Lord Millett

Citations:

Times 22-Dec-1999, Gazette 13-Jan-2000, [1999] UKHL 51, [2000] 1 All ER 135, [2000] 2 WLR 1, [2001] 1 AC 300

Links:

House of Lords, House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 9, Summary Jurisdiction (Process) Act 1881

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Criminal Practice

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.135142

Welland, Regina v: CACD 14 Sep 2018

The defendant appealed from his conviction for causing injury from dangerous driving. During his trial he suffered epileptic fits which were witnessed by the jury. The trial continued in part in his absence. He said that a new trial should have been ordered.
Held: The appeal succeeded: ‘the appellant’s conviction is unsafe because the decision to proceed with the trial was made without proper regard to the principle that an accused is entitled to a fair trial, which includes a fair opportunity to give evidence in his own defence.’

Judges:

Leggatt LJ, Lewis, Carr DBE JJ

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Crim 2036

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.622343

Mckeown v The United Kingdom: ECHR 11 Jan 2011

The applicant alleged that his trial for terrorism related offences was unfair because of the way the courts in Northern Ireland had approached the question of non-disclosure of prosecution papers to the defence on grounds of public interest immunity.

Citations:

[2011] ECHR 22

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Citing:

See Also – McKeown v The United Kingdom ECHR 1-Apr-2008
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Criminal Practice, Northern Ireland

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.443850

Shehzad, Regina (on The Application of) v Newcastle Crown Court and Another: Admn 21 May 2012

The claimant sought judicial review of a decision refusing him bail. He was accused of rape and of having bought a woman who had been trafficked.
Held: In refusing bail, the judge had not expresed himself to be satisfied to the standard required under the Bail Act. Though the judge may in fact have applied the test and misexpressed himself, review was granted.

Judges:

Foskett J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 1453 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Bail Act 1976

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.459829

BW, Regina (on The Application of) v Caernarfon Youth Court and Another: Admn 27 Mar 2013

The defendant youth having been convicted on his plea of several sexual offences, now sought judicial review of the decision to commit him to the Crown Court for sentence.

Judges:

Pitchford LJ, Wyn Williams J

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 1466 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 3C

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.510802

Regina v Van Bokkum: CACD 7 Mar 2000

Tuckey LJ rejected, as contrary to Galbraith, the proposition that in a case dependent on circumstantial evidence, the judge would be required to withdraw the case if some inference other than guilt could reasonably be drawn from the facts proved: he should only withdraw it if he considered it unsafe for the jury to conclude that the defendant was guilty on the totality of the evidence.

Judges:

Tuckey LJ

Citations:

Unreported, 199900333/Z3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Galbraith CCA 1981
Rejection of Submission of No Case to Answer
The defendant had faced a charge of affray. The court having rejected his submission of having no case to answer, he had made an exculpatory statement from the dock. He appealed against his conviction.
Held: Lord Lane LCJ said: ‘How then . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.510098

Boodhoo (A Solicitor), Re (Wasted costs order): CACD 26 Jan 2007

The solicitor appealed a wasted costs order. He had been instructed by the defendant but the defendant had indicated his intention not to answer to his bail, and the solicitor had declined to continue his defence in the defendant’s absence, after an application for an adjournment had been refused.
Held: The appeal succeeded. Many issues might arise in a trial where the inability of a solicitor to take instructions might prove a professional embarassment: ‘while the solicitor’s presence might give an appearance of fairness, the fairness would be more apparent than real; it would be no more than a fig leaf to fairness. ‘

Judges:

Lord Justice Pill, Mrs Justice Rafferty and Mr Justice Griffith Williams, QC

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Crim 14, Times 05-Feb-2007

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice, Legal Professions

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.248842

Regina v Crown Prosecution Service, Re Interlocutory Application: CACD 7 Sep 2005

The defendants in a forthcoming trial had applied for disclosure of surveillance tapes (some 15,000 hours) made during the investigations anticipating an application for a finding of abuse of process. Some had been served, but the prosecutor now appealed asking whether the protection of the defendants’ human rights required the disclosures.

Judges:

Rose VP LJ, Owen, Mitting JJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Crim 2342

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Procedure and Investigation Act 1996 35 36, European Convention on Human Rights 6(3)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v L, G etc CACD 17-Jun-2005
A cash sum of andpound;87,000 was transferred. The defendants appealed against a ruling under the 1996 Act, saying that at the time of its transfer, the property did not represent criminal property under the Act.
Held: The pre-conditions for . .

Cited by:

Cited – H, Regina v Re Interlocutory Application CACD 7-Jul-2006
The defendant sought leave to appeal against a refusal of a crown court judge at a preparatory hearing to order disclosure.
Held: Because orders for disclosure would not form part of the material to be considered in a preparatory hearing as . .
Cited – H, Regina v (Interlocutory application: Disclosure) HL 28-Feb-2007
The trial judge had refused an order requested at a preparatory hearing by the defence for the disclosure of documents held by the prosecutor. The House was now asked whether a right of appeal existed against such a refusal.
Held: The practice . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.249351

Kent Pharmaceuticals Ltd and others v Serious Fraud Office: Admn 2002

There was to be an investigation by the SFO into allegations that some in the pharmaceutical industry were dishonestly increasing the price charged for drugs supplied to the NHS. On 27th March 2002 District Judge Nicholas Evans received written application for warrants.
Held: The court considered the statutory requirements applicable to such warrants, and the relevant provisions of the Human Rights Act. The starting point was said to be sections 15 and 16 of the 1984 Act. Lord Woolf CJ assumed without finally deciding that ‘all the requirements of sections 15 and 16 have to be complied with if a warrant is to protect a search and the seizure of goods within premises to which it relates’. As to section 2 of the 1987 Act: ‘The structure of section 2 is clear. It is intended that the powers that are given to the Director under subsection (3) should be used to obtain documents, if it is appropriate to do so, and it is only in cases that do not lend themselves to being dealt with under subsection (3) that the powers contained in subsections (4) and (5), which were those used here by the SFO, in entering the premises in question, can be used.’ The hard drive of a computer would be ‘a document’ and, which it is true that section 2(18) defined ‘document’ in broad terms.
The court accepted a submission that Article 8 of the European Convention had to be taken into account when considering sections 15 and 16 of the 1984 Act, and section 2 of the 1987 Act: ‘In what I have said so far I have had fully in mind the fact that on any showing there is an intrusion into the protection provided by Article 8(1) where searches of the sort that took place in this case, and the removal of material as happened here, occur. However, Article 8(1) does not stand by itself; it stands subject to Article 8(2). It is my view that in drawing the legislation contained in PACE in the terms that it has, parliament is endeavouring to give statutory effect to the same principles which Article 8 is designed to protect .. The need to consider Article 8 only arises if sections 15 and 16 do not provide sufficient protection in themselves. In my judgment they do. Article 8 in a case of this sort does not add anything to what has been the position hitherto.’

Judges:

Lord Woolf CJ

Citations:

[2002] EWCA 3023

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 15 16, Criminal Justice Act 1987 2, European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Energy Financing Team Ltd and others v The Director of the Serious Fraud Office, Bow Street Magistrates Court Admn 22-Jul-2005
The claimants sought to set aside warrants and executions under them to provide assistance to a foreign court investigating alleged unlawful assistance to companies in Bosnia Herzegovina.
Held: The issue of such a warrant was a serious step. . .
Cited – Faisaltex Ltd and others, Regina (on the Application of) v Crown Court Sitting at Preston and others etc Admn 21-Nov-2008
Nine claimants sought leave to bring judicial review of the issue of search warrants against solicitors’ and business and other premises, complaining of the seizure of excluded material and of special procedure material. There were suspicions of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Human Rights

Updated: 23 May 2022; Ref: scu.230388

Regina v Thompson and others: CACD 1995

The court considered the circumstances under which an accused could call in aid the convictions of a co-defendant:
Held: It was fundamental that it is not normally relevant to enquire into a defendant’s previous character or to ask questions which tend to show that he has previously committed some criminal offence. A defendant is always entitled to call evidence of his own good character or other evidence ‘in disproof of his own guilt’ of the offence charged against him. The test is whether the evidence is relevant or not to the question of guilt. The evidence was relevant ‘if it tended to show that the version of the facts put forward by one co-accused was more probable than that put forward by the other’ When there is more than one defendant, the test of relevance must be applied strictly to avoid prejudice to a co-defendant.

Judges:

Evans LJ

Citations:

[1995] 2 Cr App Rep 589

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Lowery v The Queen PC 1974
(Victoria) A young girl was sadistically murdered. The two accused, were present and the crime was committed by one or the other, or both. Each brought evidence of the unlikelihood that he could have committed the murder. L emphasised his good . .
Cited – Regina v Miller 1952
The fact that a defendant has previous convictions is not normally relevant: ‘The fundamental principle, equally applicable to any question that is asked by the defence as to any question that is asked by the prosecution, is that it is not normally . .
Cited – Regina v Bracewell CACD 1978
When there is more than one defendant in a case, the test of the relevance of an accused’s previous convictions before their admission into evidence, must be strictly applied ‘for if irrelevant and therefore inadmissible evidence is admitted, the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Randall (EP) CACD 21-Feb-2003
The defendant had been a co-accused on a charge of murder. He appealed saying the judge had incorrectly directed the jury on the relevance of his co-accused’s previous convictions for violence.
Held: The appeal was allowed. He should have been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence, Criminal Practice

Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.189886

Secretary of State for the Home Deparment v AN: Admn 31 Jul 2009

The court re-considered a control order made on the basis of material withheld from the defendant. The Secretary of State had now withdrawn his reliance on that material, rather than make further disclosures. The prosecution invited the court to undertake not the exercise required by section 3(10) of the 2005 Act – to determine whether the decision of the Secretary of State that the requirements of section 2(1)(a) and (b) were satisfied for the making of the order – but to ask whether or not, given the withdrawal of the material upon which the decision was essentially founded, it remains possible to uphold that decision on the basis of what is left.
Held: ‘if I can perform a task that is closer to the statutory exercise than that which [the prosector] suggests, I should.’ The court had had jurisdiction to make the original order, and the order was not therefore a nullity. The court would not quash it, but ‘an order, lawful at inception, but which can no longer be sustained, should be revoked.’ It would be for a judge presented with any new application to assess the evidence then presented.

Judges:

Mitting J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 1966 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 3(10)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Secretary of State for the Home Department v MB; Same v AF HL 31-Oct-2007
Non-derogating control orders – HR Compliant
MB and AF challenged non-derogating control orders made under the 2005 Act, saying that they were incompatible with their human rights. AF was subject to a curfew of 14 hours a day, wore an electronic tag at all times, could not leave a nine square . .
Cited – Secretary of State for the Home Department v AT and AW Admn 20-Mar-2009
Each claimant appealed against refusal of the Secretary to vary the non-derogating control orders to which they were subject.
Held: When the Secretary of State makes the decision to make a control order on a materially erroneous basis, the . .
Cited – Secretary of State for the Home Department v AF AN and AE (No 3) HL 10-Jun-2009
The applicants complained that they had been made subject to non-derogating control orders as suspected terrorists, but that the failure to inform them of the allegations or evidence against them was unfair and infringed their human rights. The . .
Cited – BM v Secretary Of State for the Home Department Admn 3-Jul-2009
An anti-terrorist control order had been made, inter alia on the basis of evidence which had been withheld from the defendant. That now being seen to be unlawful, the Secretary of State had withdrawn that evidence. The court was asked whether the . .
Cited – Secretary of State for the Home Department v JJ and others HL 31-Oct-2007
The Home Secretary appealed against a finding that a non-derogating control order was unlawful in that, in restricting the subject to an 18 hour curfew and otherwise severely limiting his social contacts, the order amounted to such a deprivation of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Human Rights

Updated: 22 May 2022; Ref: scu.368625

Regina v Liverpool Magistrates’ Court, Ex parte Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 1996

An order was made by a stipendiary magistrate hearing committal proceedings in a drugs case. By his order he had ruled that under-cover officers, although permitted to give evidence shielding their faces from the public in court, should not be permitted to withhold their true names and identity.
Held: Judicial review was granted.

Judges:

Beldam LJ and Smith J

Citations:

(1996) 161 JP 43

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Davis HL 18-Jun-2008
The defendant had been tried for the murder of two men by shooting them at a party. He was identified as the murderer by three witnesses who had been permitted to give evidence anonymously, from behind screens, because they had refused, out of fear, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.270017

Regina v Crown Court Woodgreen, ex parte Howe: QBD 1991

The applicant has no right to make more than one application under section 31(1).

Judges:

Watkins LJ and Anthony Evans J

Citations:

(1991) 93 Cr App R 213

Statutes:

Powers of Criminal Courts Act 1973 31

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Leicester Crown Court (Her Honour Judge Mayor QC) ex parte Kaur CA 31-Mar-1997
The applicant sought leave to appeal refusal of leave to bring judicial review of a decision to estreat her recognisance given for the attendance of her son at court. The request had been out of time, and the judge had found her culpable as to his . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.242685

Regina v Watford Magistrates Court ex parte Lenman: QBD 1993

Youths were accused of a violent disorder in the cenre of Watford. Witnesses feared for their safety and made statements to the police under pseudonyms, and at the committal hearing application was made that they give evidence under these pseudonyms, behind screens and with their voices disguised. The defendants opposed this application and the magistrates’ court ruled that the witnesses should retain their anonymity but that the advocates and legal representatives should be able to see the witnesses. The dfendants now challenged the ruling.
Held: There is jurisdiction at common law to admit incriminating evidence given against the defendant by anonymous witnesses, and it was ‘well established that there may be occasions upon which the interests of justice require that the identity of witnesses should be withheld’.

Judges:

Beldam LJ and Laws J

Citations:

[1993] CLR 388

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Davis (Iain); Regina v Ellis, Regina v Gregory, Regina v Simms, Regina v Martin CACD 19-May-2006
The several defendants complained at the use at their trials of evidence given anonymously. The perceived need for anonymity arose because, from intimidation, the witnesses would not be willing to give their evidence without it.
Held: The . .
Cited – Regina v Davis HL 18-Jun-2008
The defendant had been tried for the murder of two men by shooting them at a party. He was identified as the murderer by three witnesses who had been permitted to give evidence anonymously, from behind screens, because they had refused, out of fear, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 21 May 2022; Ref: scu.242458

Thongjai v the Queen; Lee Chun-Kong v the Queen: PC 5 Aug 1997

HL (Hong Kong) A challenge on the admissibility of an admission is not inconsistent with a denial that it had been made; one is question for judge, the other a question of fact for the jury. Lord Hutton aid that Lord Bridge’s speech in Ajodha was not to be read restrictively as limited to written statements or that ‘an issue of voluntariness for the judge to decide can only arise if the evidence of the prosecution suggests that the admission may be involuntary’, and
‘Whilst the statements considered by the Board in the Ajodha case were written statements, their Lordships are clearly of opinion that the principle stated by Lord Bridge applies also to oral admissions. Therefore where the prosecution alleges that the defendant made an oral admission, and the case is raised on behalf of the defendant that he did not make the oral admission and that he was ill-treated by the police before or at the time of the alleged admission, two issues are raised which are not mutually exclusive. The first issue, which is for the judge to decide, is whether, on the assumption that the alleged admission was made, it is inadmissible as being involuntary. The second issue, which is for the jury to decide if the judge rules that the alleged admission is admissible in evidence, is whether the admission was in fact made.’

Judges:

Lord Hutton

Citations:

Times 05-Aug-1997, [1997] UKPC 31

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Explained – Ajodha v The State PC 1982
(From Court of Appeal of Trinidad and Tobago) Lord Bridge of Harwich asked: ‘. . when the prosecution proposes to tender in evidence a written statement of confession signed by the accused and the accused denies that he is the author of the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Cletus Timothy, Dexter Reid and Sheldon Lewis v The State PC 22-Apr-1999
PC (Trinidad and Tobago) The defendants appealed their convictions for murder. They asserted that the police had extracted confessions by torture, and that other evidence had been obtained by oppression.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.89878

Stanford v United Kingdom: ECHR 11 Apr 1994

A defendant’s difficulty in hearing the case because of a screen erected to protect the identity of witnesses did not vitiate the trial or make it unfair. The right to a fair trial included the right to be present and in a position to follow the proceedings.

Judges:

R. Ryssdal, P

Citations:

Ind Summary 11-Apr-1994, Times 08-Mar-1994, 16757/90, [1994] Ser A No 282-A, [1994] ECHR 6

Links:

Worldlii, HUDOC, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Citing:

Cited – Rex v Smellie CCA 1919
The defendant was accused of mistreating his eleven year old daughter. He was ordered to sit upon the stairs leading to the dock, out of her sight, in order to avoid her being intimidated.
Held: A judge could, using the courts own powers to . .
Cited – Rex v Lee Kun CCA 1916
Accused must hear and understand the proceedings
A judge, from the moment he embarks upon a trial until he is functus officio that trial, is under a duty to ensure that both the process and substance of the trial is fair, and that both are duly compliant with appropriate principles. Lord Reading . .

Cited by:

Cited – SC v The United Kingdom ECHR 15-Jun-2004
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1 ; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient ; Costs and expenses (domestic proceedings) – claim rejected ; Costs and expenses . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Human Rights

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.89490

Lawrence Pat Sankar v State of Trinidad and Tobago: PC 16 Dec 1994

(Trinidad and Tobago) An advocate’s failure to advise his client on the need for him to give evidence, and the consequences of his not doing so may be enough to justify an appeal against conviction.

Citations:

Independent 12-Jan-1995, Times 28-Dec-1994, [1994] UK PC 1, [1995] 1 WLR 194, No 22 of 1993, [1994] UKPC 49

Links:

PC, Bailii, Bailii

Cited by:

distinguished – Codrington v the Queen (Belize) PC 27-Mar-1996
The appellant had been convicted of murder. He had two grounds of appeal, that the judge had failed to get right the burden of proof, and that his counsel had not allowed him to give evidence when he had wanted to. The case was remitted. Although . .
Cited – Boodram v The State PC 10-Apr-2001
(Trinidad and Tobago) On a retrial, the defendant’s counsel only became aware that there had been an earlier trial late in the proceedings, and, when he became aware of it, he did not try to obtain the transcript of the first trial in order to . .
Cited – Anderson v HM Advocate HCJ 1996
The court considered the effect on a conviction of a failure by defence counsel. After considering the authorities: ‘It can only be said to have resulted in a miscarriage of justice if it has deprived the accused of his right to a fair trial. That . .
Cited – Bally Sheng Balson v The State PC 2-Feb-2005
PC (Dominica) The appellant had been convicted of the murder of his partner and appealed the conviction.
Held: The case did not fall within the case of Anderson, and counsel’s failure was not such as to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Commonwealth

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.89005

Hamilton and Another v Naviede and Director of SFO: HL 26 Jul 1994

A Company Court Judge may not fetter the later use of insolvency interviews by a criminal court. The obligation to give the information will not prejudice the fairness of a possible criminal trial, since the accused would still have the protection of section 78 of the Act of 1984.

Judges:

Lord Browne-Wilkinson

Citations:

Independent 26-Jul-1994, Times 26-Jul-1994, [1995] 2 AC 75, [1994] 3 All ER 814, [1995] 1 Cr App R 95, [1994] 3 WLR 656

Statutes:

Insolvency Act 1986 236, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 78

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Hertfordshire County Council, ex parte Green Environmental Industries Ltd and Another HL 17-Feb-2000
A notice was given to the holder of a waste disposal licence to require certain information to be provided on pain of prosecution. The provision of such information could also then be evidence against the provider of the commission of a criminal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency, Criminal Practice

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.81190

Gohil, Regina v: CACD 15 Feb 2018

Re-opening of appeal – prosecution said to have failed to make full and proper disclosure – CACD Powers

Judges:

Gross LJ, William Davis, Garnham JJ

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Crim 140, [2018] 1 WLR 3697, [2018] 1 Cr App R 30, [2018] WLR(D) 105, [2018] Crim LR 669

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime, Criminal Practice

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.623993

Bahbahani, Regina v: CACD 5 Feb 2018

Appeal from conviction – he had been impersonated by another at his trial. He lived abroad, and his property managed by his attorney and agent. The conviction related to a planning enforcement notice. The court now considered its jurisdiction to attack a summary trial in the Magistrates Court rather than a Crown Court.
Held:

Judges:

Lord Burnett of Maldon CJ

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Crim 95, [2018] WLR(D) 67, [2018] 2 WLR 1658, [2018] Lloyd’s Rep FC 149, [2018] 1 Cr App R 29, [2018] Crim LR 682

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Senior Courts Act 1981 38 53(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.623988

Regina v Froud: CACD 1990

The defendant appealed saying that the judge had wrongly accepted an amendment of the jury’s verdict.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. The verdict of not guilty had been corrected almost instantaneously and the judge had rightly exercised his discretion in accepting the amendment.

Citations:

[1990] Crim LR 197

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Tantram; Regina v Bibby etc CACD 24-May-2001
The defendants appealed against their convictions for conspiracy in have combined to put into the human food chain poultry meat which had been condemned as unfit. The jury after retiremen had indicated that they had reached agreement on some . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.534462

Regina v Matthews: CACD 1990

The court gave guidance on the meaning of the word ‘interview’ when used in the Codes of Practice. Morland J said: ‘In our judgment it is not within the spirit of the Act or the code that ‘interview’ should be given a restricted meaning. Normally any discussion or talk between a suspect or prisoner and a police officer about an alleged crime will amount to an ‘interview’, whether instigated by the suspect, or prisoner or a police officer . .’

Judges:

Morland J

Citations:

[1990] 91 Cr App R 43

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Hughes v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 12-Oct-2009
The defendant appealed against her conviction for aggravated vehicle taking. She was found near the scene of a road traffic accident involving a stolen car, and her fingerprint on an isnide rear window. She submitted that the officers had asked as . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.463270

Regina v Liverpool Stipendiary Magistrates ex parte Ellison: QBD 1990

Bingham LJ said: ‘If any criminal court at any time has cause to suspect that a prosecutor may be manipulating or using the procedures of the court in order to oppress or unfairly to prejudice a defendant before the court, I have no doubt that it is the duty of the court to inquire into the situation and ensure that its procedure is not being so abused. Usually no doubt such inquiry will be prompted by a complaint on the part of the defendant. But the duty of the court in my view exists even in the absence of a complaint.’
Leggatt J said: ‘Where a prosecutor applies to withdraw one charge and substitute another, which on the face of it is less serious, the magistrates’ court will ordinarily have no reason to object, and indeed no ground for doing so, provided that their powers of sentence remain sufficient. Here it is said that the stipendiary magistrate should have required the prosecutor to proceed on the charge of attempted theft instead of the charge of interfering with a motor vehicle, because the effect of the substitution was, as it is put, to deprive the defendant of his right to trial by jury. It is therefore said to have constituted an abuse of process, notwithstanding that the applicant was thereby rendered vulnerable to a less severe maximum punishment.
The key to the determination of this case appears to me to be that a defendant arraigned in a magistrates’ court has in truth no absolute right to trial by jury. Whether he has such a right depends on the charge which is preferred against him. Until the more serious charge . . was withdrawn the applicant enjoyed such a prospective right, but in relation to the less serious charge he did not. To speak of depriving the applicant of his right to trial by jury is . . only a pejorative way of making the point that upon reduction of the charge he ceased to be confronted by a charge sufficiently serious to warrant a right to trial by jury. In the absence of bad faith on the part of the prosecutor or of unfairness or prejudice to the accused, the prosecutor’s motive in making the substitution was irrelevant. The question is whether the substitution is in this sense a proper one.’
and ‘Whilst it is no doubt preferable that the charge ultimately made against a defendant should be correct in the first place that cannot always occur.’

Judges:

Bingham LJ, Leggatt J

Citations:

[1990] RTR 220

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Louca v A German Judicial Authority SC 19-Nov-2009
The defendant resisted extradition saying that the European Arrest Warrant was defective in not revealing the existence of two earlier such warrants. He said that absence of such information would hinder a court which was concerned as to possible . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic, Criminal Practice

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.380336

Munroe v Director of Public Prosecutions: QBD 1988

The court considered whether the Crown Court had any jurisdiction to re-open issues of fact decided by the magistrates. A Newton hearing had not been held. The defendant challenged the right of the Crown Court itself to conduct such a hearing.
Held: Glidewell LJ said: ‘In our view, if the magistrates do hear evidence in order to decide the facts, and thereafter under section 38 commit the accused to the Crown Court for sentence, the magistrates should ensure that the Crown Court is informed of the facts they have so found. The Crown Court should then normally proceed to sentence upon the version of the facts found by the magistrates and should not allow the dispute as to the facts to be reopened. But if, on the other hand, the accused does not raise an issue as to the facts until he reaches the Crown Court, while, as we have said, the court has a discretion to remit the issue to the magistrates, we think that the discretion should normally be exercised by the Crown Court following the course advised by Watkins LJ, that is, by determining the issue itself, after hearing any necessary evidence before proceeding to sentence.’

Judges:

Glidewell LJ

Citations:

[1988] 152 JP 567

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Gillan v The Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 15-Feb-2007
Before committing the defendant for sentence, the magistrates court had itself decided on disputed facts behind the plea. After being committed to the Crown Court, the defendant asked that court to conduct a further hearing to determine the facts. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.253208

Regina v Mitchell: CACD 1977

The court considered the effect of changes in the law after a conviction on applications for leave to appeal out of time.
Held: Lane LJ said: ‘This is an application for an extension of time in which to appeal against conviction. It should be clearly understood, and this Court wants to make it even more abundantly clear, that the fact there has been an apparent change in the law or, to put it more precisely, that previous misconceptions about the meaning of a statute have been put right, does not afford a proper ground for allowing an extension of time in which to appeal against conviction.’

Judges:

Lane LJ

Citations:

(1977) 65 Cr App R 185

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Approved – Regina v Hawkins (Paul) CACD 2-Aug-1996
The defendant sought leave to appeal out of time after a guilty plea.
Held: Leave was not granted despite a subsequent ruling on the Theft Act, which showed the basis of the original plea to have been wrong in law. No injustice had been shown, . .
Cited – Steele, Whomes and Corry , Regina v CACD 22-Feb-2006
The convictions had been referred back to the Court of Appeal in relation to various grounds, but the s.34 direction was a further ground relied on by the appellants. The Court recognised that the direction was inadequate by reference to the . .
Cited – Regina v Kansal (2) HL 29-Nov-2001
The prosecutor had lead and relied at trial on evidence obtained by compulsory questioning under the 1986 Act.
Held: In doing so the prosecutor was acting to give effect to section 433.
The decision in Lambert to disallow retrospective . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.244710

Practice Direction (Criminal proceedings: Classification and allocation of busienss): SC 26 May 2005

A detailed Practice Direction was handed down as to the classification of offences to be used in deciding how criminal cases were to be allocated on committal to the Crown Court.

Judges:

Lord Woolf LCJ

Citations:

Times 08-Jun-2005

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Amended – Practice Direction (Criminal Proceedings: Consolidation) CACD 8-Jul-2002
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.226039

Stafford v Director of Public Prosecutions: HL 1974

The House rejected the submission of counsel that the Court of Appeal had asked the wrong question by taking as the test the effect of the fresh evidence on their mind and not the effect that the evidence would have had on the mind of the jury. It would be anomalous for the court to say that the evidence raised no doubt whatever in their minds but might have raised a reasonable doubt in the minds of the jury. Lord Kilbrandon said that the test to be applied by each member of the appellate court is: ‘Have I a reasonable doubt, or perhaps even a lurking doubt, that this conviction may be unsafe or unsatisfactory?’ Viscount Dilhorne: ‘While . . the Court of Appeal and this House may find it a convenient approach to consider what a jury might have done if they had heard the fresh evidence, the ultimate responsibility rests with them and them alone for deciding the question [whether or not the verdict is unsafe].’

Judges:

Lord Kilbrandon, Viscount Dilhorne

Citations:

[1974] AC 878, [1973] 3 All ER 762, [1973] 3 WLR 719, (1974) 58 Cr App R 256

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina v Stafford CACD 1968
The court considered the admission of evidence which had become available only after the trial.
Held: ‘public mischief would ensue and legal process could become indefinitely prolonged were it the case that evidence produced at any time would . .
Cited – Regina v Cooper (Sean) CACD 1969
The court considered its power to interfere with a jury’s verdict where a trial had been properly conducted: ‘every issue was before the jury and in which the jury was properly instructed, and, accordingly, a case in which this court will be very . .

Cited by:

Approved – Regina v Pendleton HL 13-Dec-2001
The defendant had appealed his conviction for murder to the Court of Appeal. The 1968 Act required the court to consider whether the conviction was unsafe. New evidence was before the Court of Appeal, but they had rejected the appeal.
Held: . .
Appealed to – Regina v Stafford CACD 1968
The court considered the admission of evidence which had become available only after the trial.
Held: ‘public mischief would ensue and legal process could become indefinitely prolonged were it the case that evidence produced at any time would . .
Cited – Pinfold, Mackenney v Regina CACD 15-Dec-2003
The appellants challenged their convictions for murder. The convictions had been based substantially upon the evidence of a co-accused who had admitted his part. They now challenged the admission by way of support of the evidence of the co-defendant . .
Cited – Kin-Hung v The Queen PC 11-Nov-1996
(Hong Kong) Despite the judge’s sympathetic directions as to the inadeqacy of the prosecution case, the defendant was convicted of two rapes.
Held: The test whether each member of an appellate court considers the verdicts ‘unsafe or . .
Cited – Kelvin Dial (otherwise called Peter), Andrew Dottin (otherwise called Maxwell) v The State PC 14-Feb-2005
(Trinidad and Tobago) Two defendants appealed against their convictions for murder. The principal witness who had identified them, had retracted his evidence, but the retraction had not been believed. He was then shown to have lied.
Held: The . .
Cited – Noye, Kenneth, Regina v CACD 22-Mar-2011
The prisoner appealed against his conviction for murder on reference from the CCRC. There were new doubts about the reliabiity of the expert forensic expert.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. Dr H’s evidence did not impinge on the essential . .
Cited – Dizaei v Regina CACD 16-May-2011
The defendant had been convicted of misconduct in a public office and doing acts with intent to pervert the course of justice. He now appealed saying that he could demonstrate that the principal witness was dishonest. The prosecution replied that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Evidence

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.182511

Regina v Riebold: QBD 1967

When looking at a plea of autrefois acquit, the court had to ask whether there were any exceptional circumstances which would make it not oppressive to grant the prosecution leave to proceed.
Barry J said: ‘I feel that I am bound to apply this general rule to the facts of the present case and to ask myself whether there are here any exceptional circumstances which would make it not oppressive to grant the prosecution leave to proceed . .’

Judges:

Barry J

Citations:

[1967] 1 WLR 674

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Connelly v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 1964
Plea of Autrefois Acquit is Narrow in Scope
The defendant had been tried for and acquitted of murder. The prosecution then sought to have him tried for robbery out of the same alleged facts. The House considered his plea of autrefois convict.
Held: The majority identified a narrow . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Beedie CACD 11-Mar-1997
Stay for Extended Autrefois Convict
The plea of autrefois convict applies only if the legal substance of the charges is same but the judge has a discretion. The plea is not limited to Connelly v DPP definitions, but is still narrow.
A 19-year-old girl died of carbon monoxide . .
Cited – Regina v Z (Prior acquittal) HL 22-Jun-2000
The defendant on a charge of rape had been tried and acquitted of the rape of different women on three previous occasions in three separate trials. The prosecution wished to call those three complainants to give similar fact evidence in support of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.180638

Regina (Director of Public Prosecutions) v Prestatyn Magistrates’ Court: QBD 28 May 2002

The defendants were charged with criminal damage to genetically modified crops in a field. They sought trial by jury but would only have a right to such a trial if the value damaged exceeded pounds 5,000. The crops would not have been made available on the market for sale, and no value was immediately ascertainable.
Held: The value was not readily ascertainable, and they represented substantial investment. Accordingly the district judge was correct to treat the value as unascertained and therefore the offence was triable either way.

Judges:

Lord Justice Sedley and Mr Justice Gage

Citations:

Gazette 11-Jul-2002, Times 17-Oct-2002

Statutes:

Magistrates’ Court Act 1980 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice, Magistrates

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.174318

Regina v Togher, Regina v Doran, Regina v Parsons: CACD 9 Nov 2000

In the light of the Human Rights Act, it would now be almost inevitable that a finding that the defendant had not had a fair trial, would lead to a finding that his conviction could not be regarded as safe. Where a defendant had pleaded guilty, but the circumstances suggested some abuse of process, it may be proper to allow an appeal to stand. The question of whether the rights of the defendant.
Lord Woolf CJ observed: ‘However, in the case of Francom [2001] 1 Cr.App.R. 17, this Court indicated, in a judgment which I gave on behalf of the Court, that we would expect . . that the approach of this Court applying the test of lack of safety would produce the same result as the approach of the ECtHR applying the test of lack of fairness. We would suggest that, even if there was previously a difference of approach, that since the 1998 Act came into force, the circumstances in which there will be room for a different result before this Court and before the ECtHR because of unfairness based on the respective tests we employ will be rare indeed. Applying the broader approach . . we consider that if a defendant has been denied a fair trial it will almost be inevitable that the conviction will be regarded as unsafe . . ‘

Judges:

Lord Woolf CJ, Steel, Butterfield JJ

Citations:

Times 21-Nov-2000, [2000] EWCA Crim 111, [2001] 1 Cr App R 33, [2001] 3 All ER 463, [2001] Crim LR 124, [2001] 1 Cr App Rep 33

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Francom; Regina v Latif (Clare); Regina v Latif (Melna); Regina v Bevis; Regina v Harker CACD 24-Oct-2000
The judge failed to give a direction in accordance with recommendations from the Judicial Studies Board and counsel in the case as to the need for the jury not to draw inferences from the defendants’ failure to mention certain facts on interview. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Brown, Regina v CACD 29-Jul-2015
The claimant, a patient hld at Rampton Hospital faced charges of attempted murder of two nurses. His lwayers had asked for the right to see their client in private, but eth Hospital objected, insisting on the presence of two nurses at all times. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Human Rights

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.88691

Regina v Sherwood, ex parte The Telegraph Group plc and Others: CACD 12 Jun 2001

When a court considered ordering a restriction on reporting of a case until after it was concluded, it had a three stage test to apply. First, would the reporting create a not insubstantial risk of prejudice. If there was no such risk, an order could not be made. Second, would an order reduce or remove the threat, and could the threat of harm be achieved by some lesser order. Only then could a court come to ask whether the degree of risk which might be run outweighed the competing duty to provide an open system of justice This was a case in which it had been necessary to order a split trial, and in addition to other factors the later trial may have been prejudiced by reporting of the first, and the order was properly made.
Longmore LJ said: ‘It is clear that the duty of the Court of Appeal when exercising this jurisdiction is not merely to review the decision of the trial judge who made the order under challenge, but rather to come to its own independent conclusions on the material placed before it’

Judges:

Longmore LJ

Citations:

Times 12-Jun-2001, Gazette 12-Jul-2001, [2001] EWCA Crim 1075, [2001] 1 WLR 1983

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Contempt of Court Act 1981 4(2), Criminal Justice Act 1988 159, European Convention on Human Rights 6 10

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – A and Others, Regina v; Regina v The Crown Court at the Central Criminal Court ex parte A Times Newspapers Ltd etc CACD 13-Jan-2006
The defendant was to be charged with offences associated with terrorism. He had sought stay of the trial as an abuse of process saying that he had been tortured by English US and Pakistani authorities. The judge made an order as to what parts of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contempt of Court, Media, Human Rights, Criminal Practice

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.88666

Regina v Southwark Crown Court, Ex Parte Bowles (On Appeal From A Divisional Court of the Queen’s Bench Division): HL 7 Apr 1998

An application had been made for a production order under section 93H of the 1988 Act which was concerned with the recovery of the proceeds of criminal conduct. The issue was whether an order obtained for the purpose of assisting in the recovery of the proceeds of criminal conduct could be used also in relation to the investigation of prior criminal offences.
Held: Police were unable to use section 93(H) to further the investigation of a possible offence. The section was intended only to further the recovery of awards after a conviction.
Lord Hutton referred to the dominant purpose test which had been adopted by the Divisional Court and to the test contended for by the Director of Public Prosecutions which would have required the judge in the Crown Court to be satisfied that the police officer applying for the order ‘had the genuine purpose of investigating the proceeds of criminal conduct and that the application for the order was not a mere device in order to investigate the commission of an offence and to obtain evidence to support a prosecution’. He went on to say: ‘I would make two observations . . The first is that if the true construction of section 93H be the one which I have suggested, then I consider that in the great majority of cases the Circuit Judge will not be faced with a situation where it appears that the police are actuated both by the purpose of investigating the proceeds of criminal conduct and by the purpose of investigating the commission of an offence, and that the judge will only have to consider whether he is satisfied (in addition to the matter certified in section 93H(4)) that the purpose of the application is to investigate the proceeds of criminal conduct. Secondly, in my opinion the nature of the dominant purpose test is well stated in Wade and Forsyth on Administrative Law . . : ‘Sometimes an Act may serve two or more purposes, some authorised and some not, and it may be a question whether the public authority may kill two birds with one stone. The general rule is that its action will be lawful provided that the permitted purpose is the true and dominant purpose behind the Act, even though some secondary or incidental advantage may be gained for some purpose which is outside the authority’s powers. There is a clear distinction between this situation and its opposite where the permitted purpose is a mere pretext and a dominant purpose is ultra vires.’
In those cases where consideration may have to be given to the distinction between the two purposes, or where it may appear that the two purposes may co-exist (an example being where the police wish to investigate a case of living on the earnings of a prostitute), I think that there will be little practical difference between applying the test adopted by Simon Brown LJ and applying the test propounded [counsel for the Director of Public Prosecutions], but if a difference were to result, I consider it to be clear that the dominant purpose test is the appropriate one to apply.’

Judges:

Hutton L

Citations:

Times 07-Apr-1998, Gazette 07-May-1998, [1998] UKHL 16, [1999] Crim LR 220, [1998] 2 All ER 193, [1998] 2 WLR 715, [1998] AC 641

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1988 93(H)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina v Guildford Crown Court, Ex Parte Director of Public Prosecutions; Regina v Southwark Crown Court, Ex Parte Bowles QBD 29-Oct-1996
The claimant objected to the use by the respondent of orders under the 1988 Act to produce records for investigation and tracing proceeds.
Held: Simon Brown LJ said: ‘In my judgment, therefore, it would be wrong to construe the words in . .

Cited by:

Cited – Pearce and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis and Another CA 18-Jul-2013
The appellants challenged rejection of their complaints that actions of police officers searching their ‘squats’ when executing search warrants, were unlawful in that they had been intended not as descrbed for the search for stolen goods, but rather . .
Cited – Miranda v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Others Admn 19-Feb-2014
The claimant alleged that his detention by the police and the removal from him of encrypted computer storage devices purporting to use powers under the 2000 Act. He and his journalist partner had received and published materials said to be of . .
Cited – Miranda, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Others CA 19-Jan-2016
The claimant had been stopped at Heathrow by the defendant’s officers, and an encrypted data device had been taken from him using powers derived from the 2000 Act. The device was thought to contain material taken from the US NSA security service. He . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Police, Administrative

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.88677

Regina v Stone: CACD 14 Feb 2001

The defendant appealed against his conviction in 1998 of murder based on a confession said to have been made to a fellow prisoner on remand. A witness supporting that confession said after the trial that he had lied under police pressure. The appeal had been allowed, and the court now considered whether there should be a re-trial.
Held: In order for a court to decline to order a new trial because of publicity which had occurred, there had to be shown on the balance of probabilities that owing to the extent and nature of the pre-trial publicity he will suffer serious prejudice to the extent that no fair trial could be held. Each case must be decided on its facts. Here, there had been very considerable publicity, but not all of it prejudicial to the defendant, and it was now some three years ago. A move of the trial away from the locality, and a proper examination of the jury should be sufficient to avoid such prejudice.
courtcommentary.com Court of Appeal can regard past press coverage as sufficient reason not to order a re-trial if, on balance of probabilities, a jury verdict of guilty at retrial would be rendered unsafe by the effect of publicity between original trial and the appeal

Judges:

Kennedy LJ, Maurice Kay, Hallett JJ

Citations:

Gazette 15-Feb-2001, Times 22-Feb-2001, [2001] EWCA Crim 297, [2001] Crim LR 465

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Appeal Act 1968 7(1)

Citing:

Applied – Regina v Graham, Kansal, etc CACD 25-Oct-1996
The court discussed when it was appropriate for the Court of Appeal to substitute other lesser convictions, after the main conviction had been declared unsafe.
Held: After studying the authorities at length, the court felt that the various . .
Cited – Regina v Gough (Robert) HL 1993
The defendant had been convicted of robbery. He appealed, saying that a member of the jury was a neighbour to his brother, and there was therefore a risk of bias. This was of particular significance as the defendant was charged with conspiracy with . .
Cited – Regina v Kray CACD 1969
Ronald Kray had been convicted of murder on 4th March 1969, and on 15th April 1969 he and a number of others were facing a second indictment charging them with murder and other offences. His counsel sought to challenge prospective jurors for cause . .
Cited – Regina v Coughlan and Young CACD 1976
Coughlan and Young were convicted at Birmingham Crown Court of conspiracy to cause explosions in the United Kingdom, the prosecution having limited the allegation to explosions in Birmingham and its neighbourhood. Charges had been brought in respect . .
Cited – Regina v McCann and Others CACD 1991
The defendants were alleged to be members of the IRA who had been found near to the home of Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. They were charged with conspiracy to murder. They did not give evidence. During closing speeches in a terrorist . .
Cited – Regina v Bow Street Metroplitan Stipendiary Magistrate, Ex parte Director of Public Prosecutions QBD 1992
Defendant policemen challenged as an abuse of process, the issue of summonses relating to events some 18 years earlier.
Neill LJ said: ‘The freeing of the Guildford Four and the comments made by the Court of Appeal attracted immediate and very . .
Cited – Regina v Central Criminal Court ex parte The Telegraph Plc CACD 1993
The court considered the effect of a jury trial in balancing pre-trial prejudicial publicity. Lord Taylor CJ said: ‘In determining whether publication of matter would cause a substantial risk of prejudice to a future trial, a court should credit the . .
Cited – Regina v Reade and others CACD 15-Oct-1993
Police officers were prosecuted following the release of those convicted of the Birmingham bombing and Garland J granted a stay of the criminal proceedings against those officers, pointing out that publicity, although a powerful factor, did not . .
Cited – Regina v Taylor and Another CACD 15-Jun-1993
In June 1991 Mrs Shaughnessy was stabbed to death at home. In July 1992 the Taylor sisters were convicted of that murder. An investigating police officer had suppressed an inconsistent statement made by a highly material witness, and there was also . .

Cited by:

Cited – HM Attorney General v MGN Ltd and Another Admn 29-Jul-2011
The police arrested a man on suspicion of the murder of a young woman. He was later released and exonerated, and a second man arrested and later convicted. Whilst the first was in custody the two defendant newspapers, the Daily Mirror and the Sun . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Media

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.88683

Regina v Tantram; Regina v Bibby etc: CACD 24 May 2001

The defendants appealed against their convictions for conspiracy in have combined to put into the human food chain poultry meat which had been condemned as unfit. The jury after retiremen had indicated that they had reached agreement on some charges, but wanted guidance on the rest. They were called into court and gave verdicts which were inconsistent with the first note. On further retirement they sent a second note wich indicated that the verdicts taken were wrong.
Held: The appeal was allowed in part. Thoughit would have been better if the judge had disclosed the full text of the jury’s first note immediately, it had not in fact affected the value of the verdict.
A trial judge has a discretion to accept an amendment to a jury verdict, but only in circumstances which disallowed the possibility of there having been a change of mind. The jury had delayed 27 minutes before delivering a note to the judge indicating a desire to alter the verdict. That delay was too long, and the verdict stood.

Judges:

Rose LJ VP CACD, Hunt, Mackay JJ

Citations:

Times 20-Jul-2001, [2001] EWCA Crim 1364

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Contempt of Court Act 1981 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Andrews 1986
Two defendants were tried for causing injuries to one child. The jury convicted the female defendant, of positive acts of cruelty against the child and returned a verdict of not guilty of those acts in respect of the male defendant. After the police . .
Cited – Lalchan Nanan v The State PC 1986
(Trinidad and Tobago) The Board refused to admit evidence that four members of the jury, including the foreman, were acting under a misapprehension when they agreed to the verdict. However, the Board accepted the possibility that other cases might . .
Cited – Rex v Green 1950
Lord Goddard CJ said: ‘Any communication between a jury and the presiding judge must be read out in court, so that both parties, the prosecution and the defence, may know what the jury are asking and what is the answer ‘ . .
Cited – Regina v Gorman CACD 1987
Lord Lane CJ said: ‘ . . certain propositions can now be set out as to what should be done by a judge who receives a communication from a jury which has retired to considered its verdict.
First of all, if the communication raises something . .
Cited – Ramstead v The Queen PC 2-Dec-1998
New Zealand. Where a judge had received a note from the jury as to intended riders to their verdict, he was obliged to notify counsel and, having seen the foreman of the jury in chambers in counsel’s absence, the verdicts had constituted a material . .
Cited – Regina v Maloney CACD 25-Mar-1996
The jury retired on a Friday. They did not agree and a majority direction was given. Later the clerk asked the foreman whether at least 10 of the jury were agreed upon a verdict. He answered, ‘Yes’. Asked what the verdict was, the foreman answered, . .
Cited – Regina v Townsend 1982
Where a judge in a criminal trial received a note from the jury as to voting intentions, it would have both been possible and appropriate for the judge to tell counsel that he had a note showing unanimity on some counts and a division of opinion on . .
Cited – Ellis v Deheer 1922
The court heard an application for a new trial of a civil action which had been tried before a jury on the ground that the verdict as delivered by the foreman was not the verdict of the jury.
Held: A jury’s deliberations cannot be questioned. . .
Cited – Regina v Froud CACD 1990
The defendant appealed saying that the judge had wrongly accepted an amendment of the jury’s verdict.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. The verdict of not guilty had been corrected almost instantaneously and the judge had rightly exercised his . .
Cited – Regina v Orgles and Another CACD 9-Jun-1993
Jurors were not to be questioned individually as to on their capacity to continue. Any questions must be put through the foreman, while the whole jury was in open court. It is an irregularity to question individual jurors in the absence of the . .
Cited – Regina v Follon CACD 1994
The conviction was quashed where the jury, having been unable to agree and been discharged, there was a disturbance in the public gallery. The judge asked the jury to retire again and they returned a verdict of guilty. . .
Cited – Regina v Millward CACD 7-Apr-1998
The defendant was tried for causing grievous bodily harm. After a majority direction, the jury returned, finding him guity. When asked if this was ‘the verdict of you all’, the formean replied ‘Yes’. The day after, he wrote to the judge to say that . .

Cited by:

Cited – Maxwell, Regina v SC 20-Jul-2011
The defendant had had his conviction for murder set aside after a finding of gross prosecutorial misconduct by the police. The Court was now asked as to the propriety of the order for a retrial. The police involved in the case had misled the CPS, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.88687

Regina v West (Rosemary): CACD 3 Apr 1996

Payments to witnesses in criminal trials by media need investigation and control. Nevertheless, the fact that a number of witnesses had sold their stories to the media before the trial, which was disclosed to the defence before or during the trial, was not considered to give rise to even an arguable ground of appeal. Lord Taylor CJ said: ‘But, however lurid the reporting, there can scarcely ever have been a case more calculated to shock the public who were entitled to know the facts. The question raised on behalf of the defence is whether a fair trial could be held after such intensive publicity adverse to the accused. In our view, it could. To hold otherwise would mean that if allegations of murder are sufficiently horrendous so as inevitably to shock the nation, the accused cannot be tried. That would be absurd. Moreover, providing the judge effectively warns the jury to act only on the evidence given in court, there is no reason to suppose that they would do otherwise.’

Judges:

Lord Taylor CJ

Citations:

Times 03-Apr-1996, [1996] 2 Cr App R 374, 95/7813/S2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Steele, Whomes and Corry , Regina v CACD 22-Feb-2006
The convictions had been referred back to the Court of Appeal in relation to various grounds, but the s.34 direction was a further ground relied on by the appellants. The Court recognised that the direction was inadequate by reference to the . .
Cited – Regina v Abu Hamza CACD 28-Nov-2006
The defendant had faced trial on terrorist charges. He claimed that delay and the very substantial adverse publicity had made his fair trial impossible, and that it was not an offence for a foreign national to solicit murders to be carried out . .
Cited – HM Attorney General v MGN Ltd and Another Admn 29-Jul-2011
The police arrested a man on suspicion of the murder of a young woman. He was later released and exonerated, and a second man arrested and later convicted. Whilst the first was in custody the two defendant newspapers, the Daily Mirror and the Sun . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Media

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.88287

Regina v Charles, Regina v Tucker: CACD 20 Feb 2001

Charles had absconded on the day he was convicted of robbery shortly before the summing up. He was arrested over a year later and sentenced. He gave instructions to his solicitors to advance and renew his applications for leave to appeal conviction and the necessary extension of time. Tucker had absconded two days before he was convicted of sexual assaults and he remained unlawfully at large at the time of the hearing before the Court. His solicitors submitted grounds of appeal against conviction and maintained that they were still in touch with him and had his authority to proceed.
Held: Courts should allow some flexibility in dealing with appeals out of time by defendants convicted in their absence after absconding. The former more rigorous approach of R v Jones should not be followed in the light of the re-inforced need for a fair trial.

Judges:

Rose VP CACD LJ, Hooper, Goldring JJ

Citations:

Times 20-Feb-2001, [2001] EWCA Crim 1755, [2001] 2 Cr App R 15

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Human Rights Act 1998

Cited by:

Cited – Suchedina v Regina; similar CACD 27-Oct-2006
Four defendants appealed convictions in money laundering cases. The first defendant operated a money exchange through which substantial volumes of cash were moved, but claimed that he believed the money to have been honestly acquired.
Held: . .
Cited – Okedare, Regina v CACD 27-Feb-2014
The court heard applications for leave to appeal on behalf of applicants who had either absconded or disappeared.
Held: The court considered whether the lawyers filing the appeals had authority, whether express or implied. ‘we are satisfied . .
Applied – Riley and Others, Regina v CACD 1-Nov-2012
Two of the applicants had absconded. One of them Bradley absconded during his first trial, and was convicted in his absence at a re-trial. He sought to persuade the Court that grounds of appeal lodged on his behalf by counsel and solicitors who . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Human Rights

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.88408

Regina v Ealing Magistrates’ Court ex parte Satnam Sahota: QBD 10 Nov 1997

A delay in appeal against a decision taken in the absence of the accused is not the sole ground to be considered for the refusal of a rehearing.

Citations:

Gazette 26-Nov-1997, Times 09-Dec-1997, [1997] EWHC Admin 993

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Appeal Act 1995

Criminal Practice, Magistrates

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.86609

Ramstead v The Queen: PC 2 Dec 1998

New Zealand. Where a judge had received a note from the jury as to intended riders to their verdict, he was obliged to notify counsel and, having seen the foreman of the jury in chambers in counsel’s absence, the verdicts had constituted a material irregularity

Judges:

Lord Steyn

Citations:

Times 03-Dec-1998, [1998] UKPC 47, [1999] 2 WLR 698, [1999] 2 AC 92

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Endorsed – Regina v Gorman CACD 1987
Lord Lane CJ said: ‘ . . certain propositions can now be set out as to what should be done by a judge who receives a communication from a jury which has retired to considered its verdict.
First of all, if the communication raises something . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Tantram; Regina v Bibby etc CACD 24-May-2001
The defendants appealed against their convictions for conspiracy in have combined to put into the human food chain poultry meat which had been condemned as unfit. The jury after retiremen had indicated that they had reached agreement on some . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Commonwealth

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.85663

Regina (Wardle) v Leeds Crown Court: HL 24 May 2001

The defendant had been held in custody awaiting committal on a murder charge. An additional charge of manslaughter was added. The defendant argued that this did not constitute a new offence so as to allow an extension of custody time limits.
Held: The issue was the actual information laid before the magistrates and whether the second one constituted a different offence. If it did, the custody time limits restarted in the absence of some abuse. The regulations did not infringe the defendant’s human right to liberty.
Lord Hope said that before having recourse to section 3 one must first be satisfied that the ordinary construction of the provision gives rise to an incompatibility.

Judges:

Lord Slynn of Hadley Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead Lord Hope of Craighead Lord Clyde Lord Scott of Foscote

Citations:

Gazette 24-May-2001, Times 13-Mar-2001, [2001] UKHL 12, [2001] 2 All ER 1, [2001] 2 Cr App Rep 20, [2001] 2 WLR 865, (2001) 165 JPN 327, [2001] ACD 82, (2001) 165 JP 465, [2001] HRLR 29

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Prosecution of Offences (Custody Time Limits) Regulations 1987 (1987 No 299) 4, Human Rights Act 1998 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – ANS and Another v ML SC 11-Jul-2012
The mother opposed adoption proceedings, and argued that the provision in the 2007 Act, allowing a court to dispense with her consent, infringed her rights under Article 8 and was therefore made outwith the powers of the Scottish Parliament.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Magistrates, Human Rights

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.86017

Regina v Campbell: CACD 14 Jul 1994

The judge is to give the jury a warning as to the strength and reliability of a handicapped person’s statement made in the absence of an appropriate adult, unless the case was strong without it.

Citations:

Times 14-Jul-1994, Ind Summary 29-Aug-1994

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 77

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.86284

Regina v Shannon (Also Known As Alford): CACD 11 Oct 2000

The defendant had been enticed to commit a crime involving supply of controlled drugs by a journalist acting as an agent provocateur.
Held: Entrapment is not a defence in UK law. It was open to the judge hearing the prosecution to exclude the evidence on the grounds that it was unfair, but there was no principle which required its exclusion. When considering whether or not to exclude the evidence on the basis that the offence had been committed at the behest of an agent provocateur, the mere fact of entrapment was not of itself sufficient to justify exclusion. Before excluding such evidence the judge must consider the effect of the entrapment on the unfairness of the proceedings as a whole.

Judges:

Lord Justice Potter Mr Justice Hidden And Her Honour Judge Ann Goddard QC

Citations:

Times 11-Oct-2000, Gazette 19-Oct-2000, [2000] EWCA Crim 1535, [2001] 1 Cr App R 168

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 78

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Smurthwaite; Regina v Gill CACD 5-Oct-1993
It is not a defence merely to show that there had been entrapment or the use of an agent provocateur, but the Judge has a discretion to exclude the evidence obtained if it would be unfair to use it. The need is to ensure a fair trial. . .

Cited by:

Cited – A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, Mahmoud Abu Rideh Jamal Ajouaou v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 11-Aug-2004
The claimants had each been detained without trial for more than two years, being held as suspected terrorists. They were free leave to return to their own countries, but they feared for their lives if returned. They complained that the evidence . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.85550

Regina v Northallerton Magistrates, ex parte Dove: QBD 17 Jun 1999

The defendant having provided sufficient evidence of his means, a court awarding prosecution costs, where the other penalty is a fine, should not allow these to be completely disproportionate to the fine. Where a defendant failed to provide sufficient information the justices were entitled to draw reasonable inferences about what they might be. Costs orders are not to be used to punish the defendant for exercising his right to defend himself. Lord Bingham C : ‘While there is no requirement that any sum ordered by justices to be paid to a prosecutor by way of costs should stand in any arithmetical relationship to any fine imposed, the costs ordered to be paid should not in the ordinary way be grossly disproportionate to the fine’.

Judges:

Lord Bingham CJ

Citations:

Times 17-Jun-1999, [1999] EWHC Admin 499, [2000] 1 Cr App R (S) 136

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 18

Cited by:

Cited – Interfact Ltd and Another v Liverpool City Council Admn 23-May-2005
The defendants, operators of licensed sex shops, appealed convictions for offences under the Act. The shops had supplied videos rated R*18 by mail order from the shops. The Trading Standards Officer said this did not satisfy the requirement that . .
Cited – Brooklyn House Ltd v Commission for Social Care Inspection Admn 25-May-2006
The defendant company had been convicted of failing to keep proper drugs records in the nursing home it ran.
Held: The prosecution by the CSCI ws necessarily authorised by the CSCI. As to the issue of intention, the offences alleged were ones . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Costs

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.85434

Preston Borough Council v McGrath: ChD 18 Feb 1999

The defendant had been interviewed by the police investigating allegations of corruption. The Council in its civil claim, exhibited documents received from the police, and obtained in that investigation. The receipt of documents by a defendant under an implied undertaking not to use them for another purpose, implied no similar cross undertaking on behalf of the prosecution. The purpose of the undertaking is not served by such an implication.

Judges:

Burton J

Citations:

Times 18-Feb-1999, Gazette 24-Feb-1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Preston Borough Council v McGrath CA 12-May-2000
The defendant had been investigated for fraud against the claimant. He had disclosed documents to the police, but now complained at their use in the civil proceedings against him.
Held: The document had not been given to the police under . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Local Government, Police

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.85029

Regina v Cairns: CACD 8 Mar 2000

It might still be proper for the Court of Appeal to admit evidence on an appeal which had not been made available on the trial, even though there appeared no sufficient reason why it had not been presented. Where the evidence was expert evidence which would have been admissible, was capable of belief, and might have based grounds for an appeal, and if the interests of justice and expediency so required, it could be admitted by the appellate court.

Citations:

Times 08-Mar-2000, [2000] EWCA Crim 21

Links:

Bailii

Criminal Evidence, Criminal Practice

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.85163

Mitchell v The Queen: PC 24 Jan 1998

(Bahamas) The judge’s decision on a voire dire to determine the admissibility of a confession should not be revealed to the jury since it might cause unfair prejudice to the defendant by conveying the impression that the judge had reached a concluded view on the credibility of the relevant witnesses and of the defendant. Lord Steyn said: ‘The vice is that the knowledge by the jury that the judge has believed the police and disbelieved the defendant creates the potentiality of prejudice. A jury of laymen, or some of them, might be forgiven for saying: ‘Well the judge did not believe the defendant, why should we believe him?’ At the very least it creates the risk that the jury, or some of them, may be diverted from grappling properly and independently with a defendant’s allegations of oppression so far as it is relevant to their decision. And such an avoidable risk of prejudice cannot be tolerated in regard to a procedure designed to protect a defendant.’ and as to whether this defect could be cured by the judge’s directions: ‘This was a serious irregularity, notably because it was calculated to convey to the jury that the judge had arrived at a concluded view that he ought to accept the evidence of the police witnesses and Franklyn Williams and reject the evidence of the defendant. That was the basis on which the jury then heard the evidence about the confessions over a number of days. The judge did not subsequently tell the jury to ignore his decision as to voluntariness of the confessions. For these reasons their Lordships cannot accept the Crown’s preliminary submission that the irregularity was ex post facto cured.’

Judges:

Lord Steyn

Citations:

Times 24-Jan-1998, [1998] UKPC 1, [1998] AC 695

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – Michael Adams and Frederick Lawrence v Regina PC 18-Mar-2002
PC (Jamaica) The defendants appealed against convictions for non-capital murder. Because of delays, the defendants had served almost the full minimum sentence.
Held: The trial judge had heard a plea of no . .
Cited – Taylor v The Queen PC 13-Mar-2006
(Jamaica) The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder. He complained that admissions against each other by the co-defendants had been entered in evidence despite his allegations of police mistreatment. The statement was the only . .
Cited – Mitcham v The Queen PC 16-Mar-2009
(Saint Christopher and Nevis) The applicant appealed against his sentence of death following his conviction for murder. He had been granted a stay of execution pending the appeal to the board and had since been given leave to appeal against . .
Applied – Thompson v The Queen PC 16-Feb-1998
(Saint Vincent and the Grenadines) When a defendant is of good character, ie has no convictions of any relevance or significance, he is entitled to the benefit of a good character direction from the judge when summing up to the jury, tailored to fit . .
Cited – Krishna v The State PC 6-Jul-2011
krishna_statePC11
(Trinidad and Tobago) The applicant appealed against his conviction for murder, complaining as to the way a former co-accused had been allowed to give evidence and the admission of a confession, saying that he had been beaten by police officers.
Cited – Williams v The Queen PC 25-Apr-2006
PC Jamaica – the appellant had been twelve when convicted on his own confession of murder. He said that the statement after oppression. The statement had been challenged but admitted without following the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Commonwealth

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.83776

In Re Sternberg Reed Taylor and Gill (A Firm): CACD 26 Jul 1999

Negligence on the part of a solicitor was capable of falling within the range of ‘unnecessary or improper act or omission’ so as to leave him open to a wasted costs order. A clerk, having stood near the place where the jury assembled, discussed the case with the defendant. A re-trial was necessary, and could easily have been avoided.

Citations:

Times 26-Jul-1999, Gazette 11-Aug-1999, [1999] EWCA Crim 1870

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Costs in Criminal Cases (General) Regulations 1986 (1986 No 1335) 3(c)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice, Legal Professions, Costs

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.82203

Michael Gayle v the Queen (Jamaica): PC 2 Jul 1996

The judicial Committee of the Privy-Council is not to be used as second court of appeal on matters of fact.

Citations:

Times 02-Jul-1996, Appeal No 40 of 1995, Appeal No 40 of 1995, [1996] UKPC 3, [1996] UKPC 18, [2012] ECHR 1636, [2012] ECHR 1635, [2012] ECHR 1637, [1990] ECHR 34, [2009] ECHR 619, [1980] ECHR 9, [1997] ECHR 205, [2014] ECHR 293, [1978] ECHR 8, [2010] ECHR 2263, [1994] ECHR 59, [2011] ECHR 2422, [1985] ECHR 14, [2016] ECHR 699, [2016] ECHR 704, [2016] ECHR 986, [2017] ECHR 32

Links:

PC, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction, Criminal Practice, Commonwealth

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.80774

Elliott (Angus Gordon) v HM Advocate: HCJ 24 Mar 1995

New evidence on an appeal was admissible only in accordance with the Act.

Judges:

Lord Justice Clerk Ross

Citations:

Times 16-May-1995, 1995 JC 95, [1995] ScotHC HCJ – 2, 1995 SLT 612, 1995 SCCR 280

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 228(2)

Cited by:

Cited – Fraser v Her Majesty’s Advocate SC 25-May-2011
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder, saying that the prosecution had failed to disclose certain matters.
Held: The appeal succeeded, the conviction was quashed and the case remitted to the Scottish courts to consider . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Scotland

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.80299

Dunkley and Robinson v The Queen: PC 1 Nov 1994

(Jamaica) The appellant’s counsel had walked out of a murder trial after a dispute with the judge, leaving the appellant unrepresented for the remainder of the proceedings.
Held: A defendant in a capital murder case is to be allowed to find new counsel after his counsel quit. A case which had continued without this being allowed was unfair: ‘. . . where a defendant faces a capital charge and is left unrepresented through no fault of his own the interest of justice require that in all but the most exceptional cases there be a reasonable adjournment to enable him to try and secure alternative representation.’

Citations:

Independent 01-Nov-1994, Gazette 09-Nov-1994, [1995] 1 AC 419

Citing:

Applied – Robinson v The Queen PC 1985
Where a defendant found himself unrepresented on the day of trial, an adjournment should be granted. The constitutional right to representation was not a guarantee of representation but a right for the defendant to arrange representation at his own . .

Cited by:

Cited – Gianchand Jahree v The State PC 28-Feb-2005
(Mauritius) The defendant appealed his conviction for possession of counterfeit bank notes, saying he had been unrepresented throughout, and that the magistrate had intervened in the character of a prosecutor.
Held: The right to representation . .
Cited – Gianchand Jahree v The State PC 28-Feb-2005
(Mauritius) The defendant appealed his conviction for possession of counterfeit bank notes, saying he had been unrepresented throughout, and that the magistrate had intervened in the character of a prosecutor.
Held: The right to representation . .
Cited – Grant v The Queen PC 16-Jan-2006
(Jamaica) The defendant appealed his conviction for murder saying that the admission of an unsworn statement by one witness and the non-admission of another similar statement who did not either attend court was unconstitutional. He shot the victim . .
Cited – Delroy Ricketts v The Queen PC 15-Dec-1997
(Jamaica) Special leave was granted to the defendant to appeal his conviction for murder. Counsel had been late for his trial, and the jury empanelled. When counsel arrived he said the defendant had not understood the judge. A trial took place as to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Commonwealth

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.80170

Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council v Debenhams Plc: QBD 16 Aug 1994

A search by Trading Standards officers was subject to the PACE codes of Practice even though it may be described as a routine inspection. The officers had an obligation to specify the power under which they acted.

Citations:

Times 16-Aug-1994

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984

Criminal Practice

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.80156