Whilst accepting that a man may not be tried again for the same offence if he was in jeopardy on the first trial ‘in considering whether he was in jeopardy, one of the factors is whether the acquittal was on the merits, by verdict at the trial or, in summary cases, by dismissal on the merits.’
Judges:
Dillon LJ
Citations:
[1983] 1 WLR 1401
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Dissenting judgment approved – Haynes v Davis 1915
The court was asked as to the meaning of a person being in peril. Lush J (dissenting) set out three requirements for a person to be in peril – (1) the court was competent to try him for the offence (2) the trial was on a good indictment on which a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Litigation Practice
Updated: 18 July 2022; Ref: scu.235921
