The claimant, the victim of an alleged assault, challenged the failure of the respondent to quash a conditional caution given to the assailant. The respondent accepted that a decision to prosecute would have been appropriate.
Held: The offence did not meet the criteria of the Code for Crown prosecutors for a caution since it involved serious violence, injury and the question of a criminal prosecution was not merely academic. The caution was quashed.
Goldring LJ, Sweeney J
[2009] EWHC 594 (Admin), [2009] 2 Cr App R 26, (2009) 173 JP 511, [2009] Crim LR 730
Bailii
Criminal Justice Act 2003 22 23 24 25 26 27
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – C v Director of Public Prosecutions; Regina v Director of Public Prosecutions ex parte C 1995
A CPS decision not to prosecute was quashed because the decision-maker had failed to have regard to one of the matters identified in the relevant part of The Code for Crown Prosecutors. . .
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 – Jones v Whalley HL 26-Jul-2006
The appellant had assaulted the respondent. He had accepted a caution for the offence, but the claimant had then pursued a private prosecution. He now appealed refusal of a stay, saying it was an abuse of process.
Held: The defendant’s appeal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Practice
Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.324680