Links: Home | swarblaw - law discussions

swarb.co.uk - law index


These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.  














Criminal Practice - From: 2003 To: 2003

This page lists 110 cases, and was prepared on 21 May 2019.

 
Regina v Harris [2003] EWCA Crim 174
2003
CACD
potter LJ
Criminal Practice
The trial judge had said to the jury that in cases of purported recognition by the witness of the accused as somebody known to him, an identification would, generally speaking, serve no useful purpose. Held: He was in error and that the conviction was unsafe. Although the holding of an identification parade in a recognition case put the matter no further from the prosecution point of view, it could be material where the recognition was disputed, since "it ignores the possibility of a change of mind and/or a failure to identify the appellant at the identification parade, of which possibility the appellant was, in the end, deprived."
1 Citers


 
Mansell v United Kingdom (2003) 36 EHRR CD 221
2003
ECHR

Human Rights, Criminal Practice
The non-disclosure of material evidence in the trial proceedings was held to have been remedied by the Court of Appeal's examination of the impact of the non-disclosure upon the safety of the conviction.
European Convention on Human Rights
1 Citers



 
 Attorney General's Reference (No 132 of 2001); CACD 2003 - [2003] 1 Cr App Rep (S) 41
 
Regina v McGrath [2003] EWCA Crim 2062
2003
CACD
Laws LJ
Criminal Practice, Magistrates
The section 51(7) notice stated that the person had been sent for trial to the Crown Court "on the following indictable only offence: burglary, aggravated." Apart from the misspelling, the point was taken on appeal that the notice did not make clear the nature of the indictable-only offence; the appellant had not been charged with the distinct offence of aggravated burglary; the notice had not followed the wording of the relevant schedule to the Magistrates' Court Act 1980, which had specified the circumstances in which a burglary would indeed be an indictable-only offence (as the case in point undoubtedly was). Held: The court recognised a real distinction between the sending of a defendant to the Crown Court and the subsequent notice, an administrative act; completion of the notice could not retrospectively invalidate the sending. Laws LJ: " We would say only that, given the plain unqualified obligation on magistrates' courts imposed by section 51(1) and the fact that section 51(7) is on any view adjectival to that obligation, we consider that it would be difficult to argue that the very existence of the section 51(1) duty in any case depends on the fulfillment of the section 51(7) duty. That is not to say that a failure to fulfill section 51(7) might not give rise to due process arguments on behalf of a defendant if prejudice or unfairness were occasioned, but nothing of that kind is in reality in play here… "
1 Citers


 
Regina v Hooper [2003] EWCA Crim 2427
2003
CACD

Criminal Practice

1 Citers


 
Gillard v The Queen (2003) 219 CLR 1
2003

Kirby J
Criminal Practice
(High Court of Australia) Hayne J explained the effect of the majority decision in Gilbert: "In Gilbert, a majority of the Court concluded that if manslaughter should have been, but was not, left to a jury as an available verdict on the appellant's trial for murder, the verdict of guilty of murder did not preclude the possibility that the jury may have failed to apply the instructions they were given. No party in this appeal sought to reopen the decision in Gilbert. It follows from what was decided in Gilbert that, in deciding here whether no substantial miscarriage of justice has actually occurred and thus, whether the proviso to s353(1) of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act applies, account may not be taken of the findings implicit in the jury's verdicts at the appellant's trial. It must be assumed that the jury may have chosen to disregard the instructions they were given, and convict the appellant of murder and attempted murder, rather than return verdicts of not guilty. Once it is accepted that the jury may have disregarded the instructions they were given, it is not permissible to reason, as the respondent submitted, from the fact that the jury returned verdicts of guilty on all three counts to the conclusion that the jury must therefore be taken to have applied the trial judge's instructions. Once it is said, as it was in Gilbert, that the jury may have disregarded the instructions they were given, it cannot be said that some levels of disobedience may be less probable than others."
Kirby J: "Having secured, but lost, the advantages of the dichotomy which he urged at his trial, the appellant now wants another trial with a further chance to contest the indictment under new rules. It is easy to feel a sense of distaste about allowing such a course to succeed."
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Crown Prosecution Service v Bentham [2005] EWHC 2013 (Admin)
2003
Admn
Henriques J
Criminal Practice, Human Rights
At the trial of a substantive claim for declarations of property rights in the context of confiscation proceedings under the 1986 Act, two interested parties sought to dismissal or stay of the claims dismissed for delay. The proceedings went back to arrests and orders in 1993. Reliance was placed upon Article 6 of the ECHR. Held: There had been two periods of unreasonable delay amounting to about 23 months in total. As to the consequences: "Has there been a breach of the reasonable time requirements? If the Court finds that there has been a breach of the reasonable time requirements:
"it may grant such relief or remedy, or make such order, within its powers as it considers just and appropriate."
Mr. Turner contends for a stay of the present proceedings and asks me to lift the restraint orders.
In assessing whether there has been a breach of the reasonable time requirements I must consider the facts of the case, the conduct of the parties and the reason for any delay. These are proceedings brought by the State to enforce a criminal order made in criminal proceedings against the Defendant.
In Attorney General's Reference (N0. 2 of 2001) [2004] 2 WLR 1 at paragraph 22, Lord Bingham stated "the Convention is directed not to departures from the ideal but to infringements of basic human rights, and the threshold of proving a breach of the reasonable time requirement is a high one, not easily exceeded. Judges should not be faced with applications based on lapses of time which, even if they should not have occurred, arouse no serious concern.
There can be no doubting that there has been a departure from the ideal in the present case. Mr Talbot acknowledges that fact but contends that in the context of the circumstances of this case as a whole this is not an excessively long period and it cannot properly be characterised as an infringement of basic human rights."
The appropriate remedy for the breach of the Convention right was to make a public announcement of the fact of the breach. No more was required as a proportionate response, balancing the interests of the individuals and the community as a whole. The delay had not prejudiced the fair hearing of the substantive issues.
European Convention on Human Rights 6 - Drug Trafficking Offences Act 1986 - Human Rights Act 1998
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Regina v B [2003] 2 Cr App R 13
2003
CACD
Woolf LCJ
Criminal Practice
The court allowed an appeal against conviction on charges of sex abuse where the underlying offences had taken place many years before. "In this case it has to be recognised that because of the delay that occurred, in our judgment the appellant was put in an impossible position to defend himself. He was not … able to conduct any proper cross-examination of the complainant. There was no material he could put to the complainant to establish that she had said that something had happened on one occasion which could be established to be incorrect. There was no material in the form of notes … which showed that she had changed her account. All that the appellant could do was to say that he had not committed the acts alleged against him. [Counsel] says that to say to a jury, when faced with allegations of the sort that were made here, 'I have not done it' is virtually no defence at all.""
1 Cites

1 Citers



 
 Regina v Paulssen; CACD 2003 - [2003] EWCA Crim 3109
 
Regina v Hartnett [2003] Crim LR 719
2003
CACD

Criminal Practice
The defendant had pleaded guilty in the magistrates' court to an excess alcohol offence. He was then committed to the Crown Court for trial on an associated charge of dangerous driving on the same occasion. He pleaded guilty to that also. He appealed saying this was an abuse under the ex parte Farley rule. Held. The appeal failed. The court explained the special features of ex p Farley and distinguished it.
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Regina v Jones [2003] EWCA Crim 3
16 Jan 2003
CACD
Mr Justice Butterfield Lord Justice Potter His Honour Judge Paget Qc
Criminal Practice
Certification of point of law for an appeal to the House of Lords: "Whether it is an abuse of process for the Crown to prosecute a charge of indecent assault under Section 14(1) of the Sexual Offences Act 1956 in circumstances where the conduct upon which that charge is based is an act of unlawful sexual intercourse with a girl under the age of 16 or an attempt thereat in respect of which no prosecution may be commenced under Section 6(1) of the Sexual Offences Act 1956 by virtue of Section 37(2) and paragraphs 10(a) and (b) of the Second Schedule to the Sexual Offences Act 1956."
[ Bailii ]
 
Khan v Lord Chancellor Times, 28 January 2003
17 Jan 2003
QBD
Mitchell J
Costs, Criminal Practice, Legal Professions
The applicant was a barrister. He had been tried and acquitted of criminal charges, and had been awarded cost from central funds. He appealed from a refusal of a claim for payment for the time he spent in preparation. Held: The applicant was bound by the Bar's Code of Conduct, which would have required him in defending himself to do so as litigant in person, since he could not represent himself professionally. The Regulations appeared to restrict a claim to actual costs incurred. He could not be remunerated for his own court appearances, but preparatory work was another matter. Boswell had extended the Chorley case, and his work should be recognised and rewarded. If Boswell had not so extended the rule, then this case would do so.
Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 16(6) - Costs in Criminal Cases (General) Regulations 1986 (1986 No 1335) 7
1 Cites


 
Regina (C and Another) v Sheffield Youth Court; Regina (N) v Sheffield Youth Court Times, 03 February 2003
23 Jan 2003
QBD
Stanley Burton J
Magistrates, Criminal Practice
In each case, youths had been committed to the Crown Court for trial but complained that the Youth Court should have dealt with the cases, and sought judicial review of the Youth Court decision. Held: The test for a review of a decision of the Youth Court is whether that decision was wrong. The court is reviewing the decision, not acting as an appellate court. Here, the statute required the youth court to commit to the crown court where the stated conditions were satisfied. Those conditions were that the offence was listed in the 2000 Act, and that the powers under subsection (3) of the section would arise. The Youth Court must consider the sentencing powers of the Crown Court, and guidance for their use.
Magistrates Courts Act 1980 24(1) - Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 91(3) 165(1)
1 Cites


 
In re Kanaris (application for a writ of Habeas Corpus) Times, 31 January 2003; [2003] UKHL 2; [2003] 1 WLR 443; [2003] 1 All ER 593; [2003] 2 Cr App Rep 1
30 Jan 2003
HL
Nichyols of Birkenhead, Lord Slynn of Hadley, Lord Steyn, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Hutton
Criminal Practice, Human Rights
The defendant faced charges with others on the same indictment. The judge called a preparatory hearing under the 1996 Act, against the others, but held a separate hearing for the defendant, at which he held a similar preparatory hearing for him alone. The defendant now complained that a separate hearing could not be held for different defendants, and that accordingly it was now out of time for him under the 1987 Regulations, and that he should be released. Held: The judge had been wrong to hold that the defendants could only be arraigned together, and a preparatory hearing held for them all. There was no rule to say that they must be dealt with together. The defendant still retained some rights to apply for bail. Courts should be careful before setting up inflexible rules, and should still bear in mind the need not to deny the defendant the protection of the 1987 Regulations artificially so as to infringe his Article 5 rights.
Lord Hope said: "a judge who is minded to order a preparatory hearing in a long and complex case should be careful not to deprive an accused who is in custody of the protection of the statutory custody time limit until it has become necessary for him to do so. Section 32(2)(a) of the 1996 Act enables a judge to exercise the powers under section 31(4) to (7) before the preparatory hearing begins, and thus before arraignment, in a way that would be compatible with the accused's Convention right. The use of this procedure should enable considerable progress to be made in the preparation and exchange of information before the judge engages in a detailed discussion of how the trial is to be managed, while at the same time preserving to the accused in the meantime the full protection of the statutory custody time limit."
Prosecution of Offences (Custody Time Limits) Regulations 1987 (1987 No 299) 5(6B) - Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 29 30 32(2)(a) - European Convention on Human Rights 5.3
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ House of Lords ] - [ Bailii ]

 
 Regina v H (On appeal from the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)); HL 30-Jan-2003 - Times, 31 January 2003; [2003] UKHL 1; [2003] 1 WLR 411; [2003] 2 Cr App R 2; (2003) 167 JPN 155; [2003] 1 All ER 497; (2003) 71 BMLR 146; [2003] HRLR 19; (2003) 167 JP 125
 
Regina v Parker [2002] EWCA Crim 90
30 Jan 2003
CACD
Lord Justice Potter, His Honour Judge Mellor, The Honourable Mr Justice Mackay
Criminal Practice
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. The fire officer suggested that the fire could not have been started without a continuous direct application of a flame for five seconds or more. She now complained that the prosecution in failing to preserve the evidence, had destroyed any opportunity for her to have the bedding investigated herself, and that the prosecution was an abuse. Held: The Code of Practice required evidence to be preserved, but in this case there was no assertion that accelerants had been used, and nor had the defendant been substantially prejudiced. Appeal dismissed.
1 Cites


 
E, Regina (on the Application Of) v Leeds Youth Court Justices and Another [2003] EWHC 173 (Admin)
31 Jan 2003
Admn

Criminal Practice

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Chute Times, 13 February 2003
4 Feb 2003
CACD
Potter LJ, Mackay J
Criminal Practice
The magistrates made a drug treatment order. The defendant breached it, and the magistrates then committed him to the Crown Court for sentence. He appealed that sentence. Held: The court asked whether the magistrates had that power. Schedule 3 of paragraph 4 did not give the magistrates that power, and nor did section 4. The right approach was to consider what would be the likely requirement on a breach when considering whether the magistrates should themselves sentence the offender.
Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 4(2) Sch3 para 4

 
Forde v Quinn [2003] EWHC 620 (Admin)
11 Feb 2003
Admn

Criminal Practice

[ Bailii ]
 
Clark (Procurator Fiscal, Kirkcaldy) v Kelly Times, 12 February 2003; [2003] UKPC 14; Gazette, 01 May 2003; [2003] UKPC D1; [2003] UKHRR 1167; [2003] 1 All ER 1106; [2003] 2 WLR 1586; 2003 SCCR 194; 2003 GWD 7-164; [2003] HRLR 17; 2003 SC (PC) 77; [2004] 1 AC 681; 14 BHRC 369; 2003 SLT 308
11 Feb 2003
PC
Bingham of Cornhill, Hoffmann, Hope of Craighead, Hutton, Rodger of Earsferry LL
Human Rights, Criminal Practice, Magistrates
PC (The High Court of Justiciary) The minuter challenged the role of the legal adviser to the district courts in Scotland, and as to his independence. Held: The legal adviser was not subject to the same system of appointments as the justices. However the system provided for a right of appeal (section 175) on questions of law, which would cover the role played by the adviser, and also the wider power under section 193 would allow general redress, in circumstances involving a possible miscarriage of justice. The adviser should make known to the parties, the legal advice he had given in private, and opportunity for comment allowed.
Scotland Act 1998 Sch 6 33 - Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 175 193 - European Convention on Human Rights ^.1
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ PC ] - [ Bailii ] - [ PC ]
 
Johnson v Stratford Magistrates' Court [2003] EWHC 353 (Admin)
12 Feb 2003
Admn

Criminal Practice

Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 1
[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Smith (Lance Percival) Times, 03 March 2003
19 Feb 2003
CACD
Pill LJ, Hunt, Poitchford JJ,
Criminal Practice
The defendant argued that the judge should have ensured that some members of the jury were black. He was a black man being tried by an all white jury, with a white victim and white witnesses. Held: The judge had no part to play in the selection of a jury, and could not influence their composition. The Convention had not changed that. A defendant's right to a fair trial was satisfied by an independent and impartial tribunal established at law. Applying Magill, a fair minded and informed observer would not have concluded that there was a real possibility of bias. It was not the case that the defendant could only get a fair trial if there had been members of his own race on the jury.
European Convention on Human Rights
1 Cites



 
 Re S (A Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication); FD 19-Feb-2003 - [2003] EWHC 254 (Fam)
 
Hutchison Reid v The United Kingdom Times, 26 February 2003; [2003] ECHR 94; 50272/99; (2003) 37 EHRR 211; [2003] ECHR 94
20 Feb 2003
ECHR

Human Rights, Criminal Practice, Human Rights, Health
The applicant had been detained over many years after committing offences of a sexual and violent nature. After one release he reoffended and was re-detained after completing his sentence. He challenged the basis of his continued detention. Held: The system of review by a sherriff's court was sufficient to provide an independent court, and the detention was lawful. However the sherrif had placed upon him the burden of proving that he was no longer a danger to be freed, and despite practical safeguards which would assist him, that burden was unfair where it could make a difference to the outcome of his application for release. The burden lay on the person seeking to justify the detention. Also the delay in concluding the cases infringed his right to a speedy trial.
European Convention on Human Rights 5.4 5.1
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Director of Public Prosecutions v North Durham Justices [2003] EWHC 409 (Admin)
21 Feb 2003
Admn

Criminal Practice, Magistrates

Offences Against the Person Act 1861 20
[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Lowe Unreported, 21 February 2003
21 Feb 2003


Criminal Practice
The jury had come back into court with a question showing that they were having difficulty in understanding the direction on provocation. A court preparing to direct the jury on the defence of provocation woiuld be wise to submit the form of direction to counsel in the case for comments.
1 Citers


 
H, Regina v Times, 10 March 2003
28 Feb 2003
CACD
Judge, LJ
Criminal Practice
To assist the smooth flow of court work, and in the interests of open justice counsel should, in the Criminal Division of the Court of Appeal, be ready to disclose their skeleton arguments in advance. This might not apply, for example, on applications for public interest immunity certificates, but would avoid the need for court time to be lost listening to them being read out.

 
Regina v Brook Times, 31 March 2003; Gazette, 09 May 2003
12 Mar 2003
CACD
Rose LJ, Gross Pitchers JJ
Criminal Practice
The defendant complained that on his trial for rape, he had been asked if he knew of any reason why the complainant should be lying. He said it had the effect of transferring the burden of proof onto him. Held: The question had been in constant use for many years, though there was no English authority on the point. Foreign authorities were conflicting. The question was not unfair and no shift of the burden took place. It was relevant, and allowed the accused to put forward some explanation he might know of.

 
Regina v Chaaban Times, 09 May 2003
20 Mar 2003
CACD
Judge LJ, Grigson J, Stephens QC
Criminal Practice
The defendant appealed his conviction, complaining that the judge had too closely controlled the length of the trial. Held: It is part of the judge's duty of case management to be alert to the interests of all the parties, including, but not limited to the defendant. Adjournments have to be justified, and the decision is for the discretion of the trial judge. The Court of Appeal must not interfere with the choices made, unless the refusal was wholly unreasonable and caused real prejudice. In this case, the request for further time had been to allow speculative investigations. The right to a fair trial is not inconsistent with a judge's right to control the time allocated.

 
Barnette v Government of the United States of America; United States Government v Montgomery (No 2) [2003] EWCA Civ 392; Times, 28 March 2003; Gazette, 05 June 2003; [2003] 1 WLR 1916
24 Mar 2003
CA
Lord Justice Scott Baker Lord Chief Justice Of England And Wales Lord Justice Kennedy
Criminal Practice, Human Rights, Jurisdiction, International
The appellant sought to resist the registration here of a confiscation order made in the US. She argued it would be contrary to the interests of justice to register it, that the US procedure would be unlawful here under the Convention, the appeal having been held in her absence. Held: It could not be said that the registration here of the order would lead to a breach of the applicant's human rights. Any breach of the applicant's human rights in the US was not flagrant. English law itself allowed such a hearing in limited circumstances. The US proceedings were seen as civil. In the interests of comity, the order should be registered.
Criminal Justice Act 1988 97 - European Convention on Human Rights 6.1
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
South West Yorkshire Mental Health NHS Trust v Bradford Crown Court [2003] EWHC 640 (Admin); [2003] ACD 68
27 Mar 2003
Admn

Health, Criminal Practice

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v H (Special measures) Times, 15 April 2003
28 Mar 2003
CACD
Kay LJ, Elias Norman Jones JJ
Criminal Practice
The defendant had learning difficulties, and sought permission from the court to have a support worker. He appealed an order made by the judge as to the steps to be taken. Held: The courts should be flexible and ready to assist where necessary to achieve fairness. Here, however the appeal court had no jurisdiction because no valid preparatory hearing had taken place under the section. However the court did take the opportunity to suggest ways in which the defendant might be assisted. The court might offer an interpreter given his language difficulties, and a detailed defence statement might be read to the jury. However the court emphasised that these matters remained for the discretion of the court of trial.
Criminal Proceedings and Investigations Act 1996 29
1 Citers


 
Regina v S H [2003] EWCA Crim 1208
28 Mar 2003
CACD

Criminal Practice
The court discussed the difficulties in admitting a video recorded interview as a defendant's evidence in chief. The court has wide and flexible inherent powers to ensure that the accused receives a fair trial, and this includes a fair opportunity of giving the best evidence he can. The defendant had learning and communication difficulties. The court could allow him the equivalent of an interpreter to assist with communication, a detailed written statement could be read to the jury so that they knew what he wanted to say, and he might even be asked leading questions based upon that document, all in an attempt to enable him to give a proper and coherent account.
1 Citers


 
Regina v Clayton Times, 11 April 2003; Gazette, 12 June 2003
1 Apr 2003
CACD
Laws LJ
Criminal Practice
A confiscation order had (inter alia) been made after convictions for cheating the public revenue, but the notice of the proceedings had misdescribed the statutory basis. Held: The mistake was procedural rather than substantial, and on the merits, the order need not be quashed.
1 Cites


 
Amalgamated Metal Trading Ltd v City of London Police Financial Investigation Unit and others [2003] EWHC 703 (Comm); [2003] 1 WLR 2711
3 Apr 2003
ComC

Criminal Practice, Financial Services, Civil Procedure Rules
The company provided trading services in financial futures. They became concerned as to the integrity of their client, and its relationship with shareholders and other companies where parties came to be arrested for fraud in the US. They sought a declaration that funds they had received were not the proceeds of criminal conduct. Held: The new power to grant an interim declaration is unexplored, but commended in Bank of Scotland -v- A. Nevertheless the approach adopted by the claimant in this case was inappropriate. They should have waited until other proceedings commenced, and then contested them. It was not appropriate to seek to require from police justification for not consenting to dealing with funds.
Proceeds of Crime Act 1995 903A - Civil Procedure Rules 25.2(1)(b
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Rowley, Regina (on the Application Of) v Director of Public Prosecutions [2003] EWHC 693 (Admin)
4 Apr 2003
Admn

Criminal Practice

[ Bailii ]
 
Attorney-General's Reference (No 14 of 2003) Regina v Sheppard Times, 18 April 2003; Gazette, 19 June 2003
9 Apr 2003
CACD
Kay LJ, Goldring, Cox JJ
Criminal Sentencing, Criminal Practice
The Attorney-General sought to refer a sentence to the Court of Appeal as too lenient. Held: The Act introduced a new power, but provided several protections. The Attorney-General had himself to consider the sentence to be too lenient, and he exercised a discretion, not a duty, to refer the case. The Court of Appeal was to be asked to give leave to refer the case, and itself consider whether it was too lenient. The Court of Appeal's leave should not be considered to be automatic. Here the reference was misconceived, mentioning elements which should not have been included, and excluding matters of mitigation which should have been mentioned. The Attorney-General had exercised his discretion under a mistake. Leave was refused.
Criminal Law Act 1977 1
1 Citers


 
Ford v The Queen [2003] UKPC 35
9 Apr 2003
PC

Criminal Practice
PC (Gibraltar) Reasons given for leave to appeal against refusal to dismiss criminal case on grounds of abuse of process.
[ PC ] - [ Bailii ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ]
 
Farnell, Regina (on Application By) v Criminal Cases Review Commission Times, 02 June 2003; [2003] EWHC 835 (Admin)
15 Apr 2003
Admn
Mitchell, Maurice Kay JJ
Administrative, Criminal Practice
The appellant sought judicial review of the respondents refusal to refer his case back to the Court of Appeal. Held: The Commission had misunderstood the way in which the Court of Appeal worked, by anticipating that it would reconsider the evidence. In this case, the defendant and the court had not allowed as a serious question the possibility that the defendant's mental condition might make him more susceptible to provocation. The commission was to ask whetther there was a real possibility that the court could not be sure the issue was properly formulated. In view of later case law, that possibility existed, and the Commission should have referred the case.
Homicide Act 1957 3 - Criminal Appeal Act 1995 13
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Crown Prosecution Service, Regina (on the Application of) v Portsmouth Crown Court [2003] EWHC 1079 (Admin)
1 May 2003
Admn
Scot Baker LJ, Pitchford J
Criminal Practice, Legal Professions
The CPS appealed against dismissal of their case by the Crown Court after no representative had appeared at court to present the case. Counsel had two cases, and had asked this to be held pending completion of the other which then overran. Counsel knew of the conflict but had not requested a 'not before' listing. Held: The court should have waited a little longer until counsel was in a position to prosecute the appeal.
Code of Conduct for the Bar of England and Wales 701
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Laycock Times, 21 May 2003
6 May 2003
CACD

Criminal Practice
The defendant appealed his conviction. Although his counsel had not objected at the time, the counts put before the jury included offences of pssessing a firearm whilst being a prohibited person by reason of having been sentenced to prison for a term over four and a half years. He now complained that this disclosed a previous conviction to the jury. Held: Prosecuting Counsel and the courts must be careful not to mix such allegations on indictments. It had been unnecessary here, and had prejudiced the defendant. However the case was overwhelming against him, and the conviction stood.

 
Lewisham v Elias [2003] EWHC 1184 (Admin)
9 May 2003
Admn

Criminal Practice, Environment

Environmental Protection Act 1990 80
[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Elliott; Regina v Pearce; Regina v McGee Times, 15 May 2003
13 May 2003
CACD
Mantell LJ, Royce, Cox JJ
Criminal Practice
In each case a witness had been unable to attend court being ill. The defendants claimed the right to cross examine the doctors as to the witness' condition. Held: The defendant should be allowed to challenge a certificate that a material witness was unable to attend court. His absence would deprive him of the opportunity to cross examine that witness.
Criminal Justice Act 1988 23
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Daley and others, Regina (on the Application Of) v Wolverhampton Crown Court and Another [2003] EWHC 1307 (Admin)
16 May 2003
Admn

Criminal Practice

[ Bailii ]
 
Aurelio Pop v The Queen [2003] UKPC 40; (2003) 137 SJ 692; (2003) 62 WIR 18
22 May 2003
PC
Lord Rodger of Earlsferry
Commonwealth, Criminal Practice
PC (Belize) A witness identified the accused only making the link between the man he knew as R and the accused as the result of an improper leading question by prosecuting counsel. There had been no identification parade as required under Belize law and the judge should have "warn[ed] the jury of the dangers of identification without a parade and should have explained to them the potential advantage of an inconclusive parade to a defendant such as the appellant. For these reasons, he should have explained, this kind of evidence was undesirable in principle and the jury would require to approach it with great care" and "pointed out to the jury that [because of counsel's leading question] they required to take even greater care in assessing Adolphus' evidence that it was the appellant who had shot the deceased" The need in recognition cases for an appropriate Turnbull direction is not diminished. Lord Rodger of Earlsferry referred to "the potential advantage of an inconclusive parade to a defendant such as the appellant.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ PC ] - [ PC ]
 
Aru, Regina (on the Application of) v Chief Constable of Merseyside Police [2003] EWHC 1310 (Admin)
23 May 2003
Admn

Police, Criminal Practice

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Jones (Timothy) Times, 04 June 2003
23 May 2003
CACD

Criminal Practice
The court had delayed part of the sentencing procedure to fix a compensation order. However if it did so, it should state clearly the reasons for the postponement, and what sentence was to be considered at the adjourned hearing. In this case a compensation order had not been mentioned. The court should make allowance for the Act.
Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 130(3)
1 Cites


 
Hewitson v The United Kingdom 50015/99; Times, 10 June 2003; [2003] ECHR 248
27 May 2003
ECHR
Mr M Pellonpaa, President, Sir Nicolas Bratza, Mrs E. Palm, Mrs V. Str Anick, Mr M. Fischbach, Mr J. Casadevall, Mr S. Pavlovschi
Criminal Practice
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8 ; Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient ; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings
The applicant had been under investigation by the police. Whilst under arrest, his garage was fitted with a secret recording device, and the evidence gathered was later used against him at his trial. Held: The secret recording in a manner which was not subject to proper regulation was an infringement of the applicant's right to private life. The Police Act was insufficient protection.
European Convention on Human Rights 8.1 - Police Act 1997
1 Cites

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Mulla Times, 20 June 2003
12 Jun 2003
CACD
Rose LJ, Silbert, Fulford JJ
Criminal Practice
The prosecution indicated that they would be prepared to accept a plea to a lesser charge than causing death by dangerous driving, namely careless driving. After comments from the judge, another prosecutor took over the case and the charge reverted. The defendant claimed this was an abuse of process. Held: The defendant had known from the outset that the judge was unhappy with the lesser charge. Only a short time had passed, and he had not been prejudiced. Appeal dismissed.
1 Cites


 
Director of Public Prosecutions v Croydon Youth Court [2003] EWHC 2240 (Admin)
17 Jun 2003
Admn

Criminal Practice

[ Bailii ]
 
Ramadan El-Delbi, Regina v [2003] EWCA Crim 1767
20 Jun 2003
CACD

Criminal Practice
The court considered an appeal where the jury had been invited to draw an inference from the defendant's silence at interview that the defendant "had not had a chance to prepare his story" as being its equivalent. Held: The court accepted the inference.
Criminal Justice nd Public Order Act 1994 34
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]

 
 Regina v Soneji; Regina v Bullen; CACD 20-Jun-2003 - Times, 01 July 2003; [2003] EWCA Crim 1765; Gazette, 04 September 2003; [2004] 1 Cr App R(S) 219
 
David McHugh, Regina v [2003] EWCA Crim 1766
20 Jun 2003
CACD

Criminal Practice

1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Dowsett v The United Kingdom Times, 12 July 2003; 39482/98; [2003] ECHR 314; (2003) 38 EHRR 845
24 Jun 2003
ECHR

Human Rights, Criminal Practice
The applicant had been convicted along with others of a murder. He now alleged that the police had refused to disclose evidence which would have supported his defence. Some had been disclosed but some still withheld on public interest grounds by the prosecution. Held: The failure to disclose in this case violated his rights. The right to have all evidence disclosed is not absolute, being balanced with other interests such as national security, or perhaps the protection of witnesses. Any such restriction must go no further than absolutely necessary, and any such difficulties must be counterbalanced by the judicial procedures followed. Here the prosecution had taken it upon itself to keep back the evidence.
The prosecution's failure to disclose material at the trial, although partly cured in the Court of Appeal had not been wholly cured. Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1 ; Pecuniary damage - claim rejected ; Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient ; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings
European Convention on Human Rights 6.1
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Kury v Maidstone Magistrates' Court [2003] EWHC 1726 (Admin)
26 Jun 2003
Admn

Criminal Practice, Costs

[ Bailii ]
 
Theobald v Nottingham Magistrates' Court [2003] EWHC 1720 (Admin)
7 Jul 2003
Admn

Criminal Practice

[ Bailii ]
 
Vickers, Regina (on the Application Of) v West London Magistrates' Court [2003] EWHC 1809 (Admin)
11 Jul 2003
Admn

Criminal Practice

[ Bailii ]
 
Edwards and Lewis v The United Kingdom Times, 29 July 2003; 40461/98; 39647/98; [2003] ECHR 381; [2003] ECHR 381; [2011] ECHR 2267
22 Jul 2003
ECHR

Human Rights, Criminal Practice
(Commission) The claimants said that the procedures used to secure their convictions amounted to entrapment, and that UK criminal procedures did not give sufficient protection so as to provide a fair trial. One was arrested with heroin, and the other in the company of an undercover officer in possession of forged currency. Each was later convicted. The prosecution had applied for and been granted permission to withhold evidence. Held: The court must examine the procedures in each case to make sure the defendants' rights were protected. In a criminal system, it was essential that an adversarial equality of arms between prosecution and defence must be maintained. Whether it was necessary for particular items to be witheld was for the national courts to determine, and the instant court could only look at the procedure followed. Here the undisclosed evidence may have related to an undisclosed issue of fact relevant to the case was decided by the judge. The procedure failed to allow the defence the adversial opportunity to test evidence, and was unfair, and infringed the defendants' rights. However the failures in these circumstances were not sufficient to justify an award of damages or otherwise.
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1 ; Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient ; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings
European Convention on Human Rights A-1
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Pierens, Regina (on the Application of) v Customs and Excise [2003] EWHC 1993 (Admin)
28 Jul 2003
Admn

Criminal Practice
The defendant appealed against an extension of the custody time limit. Held: The Act provides against an extension where the prosecution has not acted with due speed. Here the delay in large part arose in one way or another at the request of the defence. The challenge failed.
Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 22(3)
[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Knight Times, 20 August 2003; Gazette, 02 October 2003; [2003] EWCA Crim 1977
29 Jul 2003
CACD
Laws, LJ, Mitting, Rivlin QC, JJ
Criminal Practice, Evidence
The defendant had given no answers during his police interview, but instead his solicitor read out a full written statement of his case. At trial, he did not depart from the statement thus provided. He appealed after the judge allowed the jury to make adverse inferences from his silence, on the basis that it had prevented the police testing his statement on interview. Held: The section was directed to ensuring the early disclosure of a suspect's case, not to provide for it to be tested. An inference should not have been permitted.
Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 34(1)(a)
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Steward v Director of Public Prosecutions Times, 25 September 2003; [2003] EWHC 2251 (Admin)
30 Jul 2003
QBD
Maurice Kay, Crane JJ
Criminal Practice, Magistrates
Magistrates announced that there was no case to answer, but then agreed evidence was put before them which clearly undermined the basis of that decision. Held: It was open to the magistrates to correct their mistake immediately. The appellant's contention was highly technical. An error had been agreed by the defendant's solicitor and admitted by the Magistrates, and the Essex Justices case did not apply.
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Al Akidi v Bulgaria 35825/97; [2003] ECHR 413; [2003] ECHR 413
31 Jul 2003
ECHR

Human Rights, Criminal Practice
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction)
The applicant asserted infringement of his rights by virtue of his detention before trial. He was arrested and detained in 1993, but his case was not concluded until 1997, with appeals running through to 1997. Held: Suspicion is a sine qua non of detention pending trial, but after a certain period it is unsufficient. Continued detenetion over a long period of time awaiting trial requires special care to ensure the detention is justified.
European Convention on Human Rights 5.3 6.1
1 Cites

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Taylor Times, 08 October 2003
13 Aug 2003
CACD
Latham LJ, Gage, Eady JJ
Criminal Practice
The defendant appealed his conviction for murder, saying the directions on provocation and diminished responsibility were flawed. Held: The direction was correct. In cases where, as here, the jury directions are complex, it was a pity that counsel were not given a draft of the proposed direction and allowed to comment on it.

 
Shirzadeh v Maidstone Magistrates' Court [2003] EWHC 2216 (Admin)
21 Aug 2003
Admn

Magistrates, Criminal Practice

[ Bailii ]
 
Tullet, Regina (on the Application of) v Medway Magistrates Court [2003] EWHC 2279 (Admin)
22 Aug 2003
Admn

Criminal Practice

[ Bailii ]
 
Walpole v Director of Public Prosecutions [2003] EWHC 2252 (Admin)
3 Sep 2003
Admn

Criminal Practice

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v D (joined charges: Evidence) Times, 09 October 2003
5 Sep 2003
CACD
Mantell LJ, Nelson, Jack JJ
Criminal Practice
The defendant faced two charges on the same indictment, but no allegation was made of similar facts. Held: In such circumstances there was a need for a clear direction that evidence on one charge did not point to guilt on the other. Otherwise the evidence might be wrongly be taken as cross admissible.

 
Taheri, Regina (on the Application Of) v Luton Crown Court and Another [2003] EWHC 2381 (Admin)
5 Sep 2003
Admn

Criminal Practice

[ Bailii ]
 
Armstrong, Re Application for Judicial Review [2003] NIQB 63
9 Sep 2003
QBNI

Criminal Practice
Application for judicial review of the decisions of the Department of the Director of Public Prosecutions to recommend prosecution of the applicant on a charge of assault occasioning actual bodily harm
[ Bailii ]
 
B R v Poland 43316/98; [2003] ECHR 435; [2003] ECHR 435
16 Sep 2003
ECHR

Human Rights, Criminal Practice
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1 ; Non-pecuniary damage - financial award
The claimant complained that the criminal proceedings against him had exceeded a reasonable time period. He was charged in 1994, and proceedings had not been yet concluded. Held: Regarding the criteria set down, this was not a complex case, and the periods of inactivity had not been short. The reasonable period had been exceeded, and the applicant's human rights violated.
European Convention on Human Rights 6.1
1 Cites

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Skawinska v Poland 42096/98; [2003] ECHR 437; [2003] ECHR 437
16 Sep 2003
ECHR

Human Rights, Criminal Practice
The applicant complained that criminal proceedings against her in Poland had not been concluded within a reasonable time. The proceedings began in 1992, and were concluded only in 2000. The respondent contended that in large part the delays were of the claimant's making. Held: Substantial delays did in fact lay at the door of the defendant, and in the light of the criteria set out in Comingersoll, the delay was unreasonable and the applicant's human rights were violated.
European Convention on Human Rights 6.1
1 Cites

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Christie, Young, Scott v Her Majesty's Advocate XC411/03; XC420/03; XC422/03; 2004 JC 13
26 Sep 2003
HCJ
Lady Cosgrove and Lord Hamilton And Lord Justice General
Criminal Practice
The defendants appealed against their convictions based upon a faulty indictment. The Act required the that when signing a bill of indictment, the signature should bear certain words signifying the authority of the signatory. The words used were incorrect. Held: The words used were sufficient for the purpose, and the appeals were dismissed.
Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995
1 Citers


 
Regina v Fraser Unreported, 2 October 2003
2 Oct 2003
CACD
Auld LJ
Criminal Practice
The court quashed a conviction following a reference by the Criminal Cases Review Commission. Detective Constable Breakwell had been a witness at the trial of Fraser. Held: "But what has emerged so far is sufficiently disturbing, particularly as to D.C. Breakwell's conduct in other cases, as in the words of Beldam LJ in R v. Maxine Edwards [1996] 2 Cr. App. R 345 at 350 F-G, to raise a suspicion of perjury that infects the evidence in this case. " and "In the circumstances it would, as the prosecution concede, be impossible for the court to be confident, that, had the jury known of these matters, they would have been bound to convict him. That is so notwithstanding that some of the matters and information about them post date the trial of the Appellant, since, if it had been available at the time, it would have been material to the jury's consideration of the officer's credibility, as the court held in Twitchell [2000] 1 Cr. App R 373."
1 Citers


 
CPS Harrow, Regina (on the Application of) v Brentford Youth Court [2003] EWHC 2409 (Admin)
2 Oct 2003
Admn

Criminal Practice

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Shillibier Times, 29 October 2003
3 Oct 2003
CACD
Rose, LJ, Penry Davey, David Clarke JJ
Criminal Practice
A single judge hearing an application for leave to appeal against conviction, does not have power to refer the case to the Criminal Cases Review Commission. Held: The Act allows only the full court to order a reference. It should be changed.

 
Todd v Crown Prosecution Service; T v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another; Todd v DPP Times, 13 October 2003; [2003] EWHC 2408 (Admin)
6 Oct 2003
QBD
Brooke LJ, Sullivan J
Criminal Practice, Media, Crime
The defendant had been under 18 at the commencement of proceedings but attained 18 during them. The newspaper was granted leave to refer to him by name upon his becoming 18. Held: Denying the appeal. The balance between the freedom of the press and the protection of youths had to be maintained properly. Once the purpose of the protection had passed, it should not be applied. The purpose of the legislation was not to protect the interests of young persons after they ceased to be young persons.
Children and Young Persons Act 1933 39
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Haque, Regina (on the Application Of) v Central Criminal Court [2003] EWHC 2457 (Admin)
6 Oct 2003
Admn

Criminal Practice

[ Bailii ]
 
Lloyd v Bow Street Magistrates Court [2003] EWHC 2294 (Admin); Times, 22 October 2003
8 Oct 2003
Admn
Lord Justice Dyson and Mr Justice Jackson
Human Rights, Criminal Practice
The defendant had been convicted and made subect to a confiscation order in 1996. A final order for enforcement was made in late 2002. The defendant said the delay in the enforcement proceedings was a breach of his right to a trial within a reasonable time. Held: The reasonable time guarantee afforded by Article 6.1 does apply to proceedings before the magistrates court for the enforcement of a confiscation order. In this case a stay on the enforcement was ordered.
European Convention on Human Rights 6.1 - Criminal Justice Act 1988 73(6)
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
P v P (Ancillary Relief: Proceeds of Crime) [2003] EWHC 2260 (Fam); Times, 14 October 2003; Gazette, 16 October 2003; [2004] Fam 1
8 Oct 2003
FD
Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss
Legal Professions, Criminal Practice, Family, Litigation Practice
The parties sought guidance from the court on the circumstances which arose in ancillary relief proceedings where a legal representative came to believe that one party might be holding the proceeds of crime. In the course of ancillary relief proceedings, the parties legal representatives concluded that some part of the matrimonial assets might represent the proceeds of crime. If they succeeded in obtaining part of the assets for their client they would commit an offence. They disclosed their concerns but were refused permission to disclose their own disclosure. Held: The representatives had a duty to disclose their concerns to the authorities, but if it was necessary to disclose the tip off for the proceedings and it formed no part of any criminal purpose, they could disclose the tipping off to the other party. The Act envisaged permission to a party to make authorised disclosures. The ambit of the Act was wider than for earlier provisions, and might affect many proceedings. Negotiations could be affected just as much as any actual transfer. The Act makes no distinction between degrees of criminal property. An illegally obtained sum of £10 is no less susceptible to the definition of "criminal property" than a sum of £1million.
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 333(4)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]

 
 Practice Direction (Criminal proceedings: Sentence appeals); CACD 10-Oct-2003 - Times, 24 October 2003
 
Regina v H; Regina v C Times, 24 October 2003; Gazette, 13 November 2003; [2003] 1 WLR 3006
16 Oct 2003
CACD
Rose LJ, Penry Davey, David Clarke JJ
Criminal Practice
The defendants were charged with serious drugs offences. The prosecutor had applied for public interest immunity certificates. The judge had required the appointment of independent counsel. The prosecutor appealed. Held: The same district judge or judge could best protect a defendant if he had also heard the application for a certificate. There were serious difficulties in always appointing independent counsel. The prosecution may not simply aim to achieve success at all costs, buty had independent duties. Where the defence could not be informed, independent counsel might be employed. In an Edwards case the prosecutor should approach the judge, and independent counsel informed as far as known of the defence case.
1 Cites

1 Citers



 
 Regina v Gleeson; CACD 16-Oct-2003 - Gazette, 06 November 2003; Times, 06 November 2003; [2003] EWCA Crim 3357; [2004] 1 Crim App R 29
 
Interlocutory Application, Re [2003] EWCA Crim 2847
16 Oct 2003
CACD

Criminal Practice

[ Bailii ]
 
Serious Fraud Office v Selby Justices and others [2003] EWHC 2453 (Admin)
20 Oct 2003
Admn

Criminal Practice

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Goss Times, 27 October 2003
23 Oct 2003
CACD
Mantell LJ, Elias, Jack JJ
Criminal Practice
The defendant appealed his conviction. He complained that the judge had not given the full good character direction, on the basis of a previous conviction for driving whilst uninsured. Held: Whether to withhold the direction was a matter for the judge's discretion. Driving without insurance might be anything from a flagrant offence to a technical one. The direction should not be withdrawn without the judge kowing the circumstances of the conviction. The failure to give a direction was a non-direction, but the giving of a bad character direction was a mis-direction. The direction went here as to credibility, but that had not been an issue in this case.

 
F v Balham Youth Court [2003] EWHC 2584 (Admin)
24 Oct 2003
Admn

Criminal Practice
The defendant faced a charge of causing actual bodily harm to a 19 year-old. There was an eye witness, who was no doubt a friend of the complainant, aged 18. The defendant was 15. When first listed for trial neither prosecution witnesses attended on time, and nor did the claimant. The complainant was in bed but there was no information about the eye witness. The claimant not having arrived, an adjournment was granted. Both complainant and the claimant did arrive later in the day. The witness gave no explanation of his absence. The trial was re-listed. Again the complainant and the witness did not attend, both being at work and the excuse was that they had thought that the trial was due to be heard the following day. That excuse was later discovered to be almost certainly untrue. Held: The court did not accept that it was correct for the district judge to have adjourned the matter.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Hillman, Regina (on the Application of) v Richmond Magistrates' Court [2003] EWHC 2580 (Admin)
28 Oct 2003
Admn

Criminal Practice

[ Bailii ]
 
Khan, Regina (on the Application Of) v Wolverhampton Crown Court [2003] EWHC 2659 (Admin)
30 Oct 2003
Admn

Criminal Practice

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina (Crown Prosecution Service, Greater Manchester) v Bolton Justices Times, 07 November 2003; [2003] EWHC 2697 (Admin); [2004] 1 WLR 835
31 Oct 2003
QBD
Kennedy LJ, Royce J
Evidence, Magistrates, Human Rights, Criminal Practice
The magistrates had been taking a deposition, and ordered police officers to be excluded from court. Held: The witness sought not to have to answer questions on the ground that he would be incriminated by his answers. Magistrates should not accept a claim for privilege without investigation. It was insufficient also to accept that this was claimed solely on the grounds of legal advice. The proceedings of taking the deposition were in open court, and the exclusion of those charged with investigating crime was an irregularity.
Crime and Disorder Act 1998 Sch3 P-4
[ Bailii ]
 
G (A Minor), Regina (on the Application of) v Inner London Crown Court [2003] EWHC 2715 (Admin)
5 Nov 2003
Admn

Criminal Practice

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Turner Times, 14 November 2003
6 Nov 2003
CACD
Scott Bakler LJ, Henriques J, Stanley Burton J
Criminal Practice
In the police station, the defendant had declined to answer police question, but had instead provided a written statement. Held: The practice had the danger that if, at trial, he discovered that something had been omitted from the statement, an inference might be sought to be drawn under the section. Here the written statement broadly accorded with the evidence he gave at trial, but there was one difference. The judge had invited the jury to draw an adverse inference merely from the defendant's failure to answer questions. That should have been limited to his failure to mention facts. The conviction was unsafe. In the case of such inconsistencies, it might be better for a judge to ask the jury to treat that earlier statement as a lie.
Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 34

 
Pilar Aida Rojas v Brian Berllaque [2003] UKHL 76; Times, 13 November 2003; [2003] UKPC 76; [2004] 1 WLR 201
10 Nov 2003
PC
Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough, Lord Millett, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe
Constitutional, Human Rights, Discrimination, Criminal Practice
PC (Gibraltar) The system of selecting a criminal jury obliged men to be available for selection, but women could choose not to be on the role of jurors. The result was that jury lists and juries were almost entirely male. Held: (Majority) Since juries are chosen at random from jury lists, a non-discriminatory method of compilation of the jury lists is an essential ingredient of a fair trial by jury. This is inherent in the concept of a fair trial by an impartial jury. Fairness is achieved in the composition of a jury by random selection from a list which is itself fairly constituted. Section 19 of the Supreme Court Ordinance violates section 8 of the Constitution in so far as it discriminates between men and women regarding liability for jury service. There is a strong but rebuttable presumption that a jury acts impartially.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ PC ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Crown Prosecution Service, Regina (on the Application of) v Winchester Crown Court [2003] EWHC 2838 (Admin)
10 Nov 2003
Admn

Criminal Practice

[ Bailii ]
 
In re May Yoong Forwell, Drug Trafficking Offences Act 1986 [2003] EWCA Civ 1608; Times, 02 December 2003
12 Nov 2003
CA
Lord Justice Schiemann Lord Justice Sedley Lord Justice Jacob
Criminal Practice
The claimant was the wife of an offender sentenced for drug trafficking. An order was made for confiscation of the proceeds of the trafficking. She sought a certificate of inadequacy. Held: Where she ws not in a position to pay the sum ordered she was entitled to a certificate. The judge had not appreciated that he had a discretion in the matter.
Drug Trafficking Offences Act 1986 14
[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Miao Times, 26 November 2003; Gazette, 05 February 2004; [2003] EWCA Crim 3486
17 Nov 2003
CACD
Rose LJ, Leveson, Tugendhat JJ
Criminal Practice
The defendant appealed his conviction for murder. His main defence had been that there had been no intention to kill, but the judge had refused to leave to the jury the possibility of provocation. Held: There was evidence of potentially provoking conduct sufficient to be left to the jury, but that there was only a speculative possibility that the defendant may have lost his self-control. There was no evidence of a frenzied attack. The two defences were inconsistent, and the evidence of whether the defendant had been provoked was tenuous. Whether a defendant had been provoked should be treated on the same basis as whether the victim had caused provocation. The case of Rossiter had been overtaken by Acott.
Rose LJ VP said: "It is for the judge to decide if there is evidence of provoking conduct, a loss of self-control. If there is sufficient evidence it is a matter for the jury. If there is insufficient material to find as a reasonable rather than as any speculative possibility, that there was provoking conduct and loss of self-control, there is no issue that the judge should not leave provocation to the jury. The trial judge is in many cases better placed than this court to assess the quality and effect of the evidence which has been placed before the jury."
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Marcelle Skeete v The State [2003] UKHL 82
24 Nov 2003
PC

Commonwealth, Criminal Practice
PC (Trinidad and Tobago) Practice for appellate court considering increase of sentence.
1 Citers

[ PC ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Grimes v Crown Prosecution Service [2003] EWCA Civ 1814
27 Nov 2003
CA
Brooke LJ, Sedley LJ
Criminal Practice, Costs
The CPS sought to enforce a confiscation order made by the Crown Court in proceedings against the claimant's husband. She successfully established that she had been beneficially entitled to a one-half interest in the matrimonial home, and was therefore entitled to half of the proceeds of its sale. She now appealed against refusal of her costs. Held. CPR Part 44 applied to the litigation. The appeal succeeded.
Brooke LJ said: "Mr Pawlak urges that the CPS is not insulated from the general rule about costs orders just because it is a public body, and that the judge's approach was wholly wrong. He drew our attention to some well-known cases, either when judicial review proceedings are brought in the public interest and there is no order as to costs, or when the police have to act for parties to a licensing appeal, when it may very well not be proper for them to be ordered to pay costs when they are performing a public function of providing the court with information. He said that their cases raised different issues.
In my judgment there is great force in Mr Pawlak's submission that the judge set about the exercise of his discretion in the wrong way. This is the second occasion within two weeks when a division of this court of which I have been a member has been concerned with an appeal in which complaint is made about an order for costs made by the judge when it was not apparent that the judge had set about his duties in the structured way set out in CPR 44.3. Of course, there is no need for judges to refer to that rule explicitly, provided that they follow its philosophy. Its philosophy required Wilson J to start with the proposition that the general rule was that the CPS, as the unsuccessful party, should have to pay the costs of the successful party. It would then follow from that that the judge should consider carefully whether there were any of the specific matters listed in CPR 44.3(4) which would take this case out of the ordinary rule and then consider all the circumstances.
It appears to me that the judge embarked on his task from the wrong end, focusing first on the position of the CPS, as a public body, and then seeking to find reasons why Mrs Grimes should displace a general rule that the public body should not have to pay the costs of a successful party in circumstances like these.
In these circumstances, it appears to be one of those cases in which, the judge having set about his task from the wrong end, this court has to exercise its discretion afresh on the materials before it. 21. One starts with the general rule. Mrs Grimes had to come to court. There had been no offer made to her to which the court's attention was drawn which made it unnecessary for her to come to court. When she came to court what she had said on paper in her affidavit was believed by the judge. I entirely understand the contention that it would have been unreasonable for the CPS to concede the totality of her claim in advance: they had their public duties to perform in relation to the need to enforce the confiscation order, and there were oddities about Mrs Grimes' statement, particularly in relation to the reasons why the property was put in her husband's sole name. But that does not, in my judgment, mean that the CPS were entitled to behave, as litigants far too often behaved before the CPR came in, by simply standing back and saying, "We will make no offer at all for the court to consider when it decides what order as to costs is a reasonable one to make. We will simply see you in court.""
Sedley LJ said: "The reason why the judge did not approach the case in this way, as it seems to me, is that he regarded the CPS as having a special litigation position or status. As my Lord has made clear, it does not. What it will have in many cases is an argument on the reasonableness of its stance which derives from the nature of its legal functions and the purpose of confiscation orders. For the rest, and I think contrary to the approach taken by the judge, this proceeding was no different from an interpleader in a judgment creditor's action. The Crown when it comes before the courts of this country does so as a litigant like any other.
. . I do not therefore think it necessary for the CPS to have laid itself open to criticism if it is to be made liable for a successful opponent's costs in a case like the present; and for my part I am willing to accept Miss Barber's doughty defence of the CPS's conduct of the case. But that leaves a simple situation in which two parties, each behaving reasonably, have met in court, where one has lost and ought therefore to expect, other things being equal, to pay the other's costs."
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v B (K J) [2003] EWCA Crim 3080[2003] EWCA Crim 3080; Times, 15 December 2003
1 Dec 2003
CACD
Dyson LJ
Criminal Practice
s34 is "a notorious minefield".
Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 34
1 Citers



 
 Regina (Director of Public Prosecutions) v Camberwell Green Youth Court ex parte C W K and A; QBD 5-Dec-2003 - (2004) 168 JP 157; (2004) 168 JPN 233; Times, 09 January 2004; [2003] EWHC 3217 (Admin)
 
Lancashire Constabulary, Regina (on the Application Of) v Burnley Magistrates Court [2003] EWHC 3308 (Admin)
5 Dec 2003
Admn

Criminal Practice

Proceeds of Crime Act 2002
[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Webb, Attorney General's Reference (No 52 of 2003) Times, 12 December 2003; [2003] EWCA Crim 3731
9 Dec 2003
CACD
Woolf LCJ, Gibbs, Fulford JJ
Criminal Practice
The reference was for an unduly lenient sentence for offences of gross indecency with a child and attempted rape. Held: Even experienced judges could be unaware of guideline cases. In this case Millberry and the Reference 91 etc of 2002 would have guided the judge to impose different sentences. Prosecuting counsel should attend court with knowledge of the guideline cases, and be ready to provide the court with copies as necessary.
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Regina v Hastings Times, 12 December 2003
9 Dec 2003
CACD
Woolf LCJ, Gibbs, Fulford JJ
Criminal Practice
At the start of the day after the jury retirement, one juror was late. The defendant complained that the jury had not all been present during the deliberations. Held: There was no magic in any particular form of words. The jury should be clear that they should only discuss the matter after the bailiffs had been sworn, and whilst they were all together. The court had to ask what was the risk that a proper verdict had not been reached. No injustice had been caused.
1 Cites


 
H v Balham Youth Court and Another [2003] EWHC 3267 (Admin)
10 Dec 2003
Admn

Criminal Practice, Magistrates, Children

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina v Cheong Wang [2003] EWCA Crim 3228
10 Dec 2003
CACD
Lord Justice Laws, Mr Justice Curtis and The Recorder Of Cardiff
Criminal Practice

Criminal Justice Act 1988 198(1)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]

 
 Attorney-General's Reference (No 2 of 2001); HL 11-Dec-2003 - [2003] UKHL 68; Gazette, 29 January 2004; [2004] 2 AC 72; [2004] 1 All ER 1049; [2004] 15 BHRC 472; [2004] 1 Cr App R 25; [2004] 2 WLR 1; [2004] HRLR 16; [2004] UKHRR 193
 
Regina v Nicholas Van Hoogstraten [2003] EWCA 3642 Crim; Times, 24 December 2003
12 Dec 2003
CACD
Mr Justice Forbes Lord Justice Kennedy Mr Justice Curtis
Crime, Criminal Practice
The prosecution appealed against the refusal of the crown court to remit the case for retrial. Held: The court had no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal against this ruling because it was not within the ambit of section 29(2) of the 1996 Act. That may be satisfactory because it seemed to be common ground that if an attempt had been made to quash the indictment at arraignment (by means of a request for particulars followed by an application to quash), or if such an attempt had been made after the jury was empanelled, in neither instance would the Crown have any right of appeal. The court was unhappy with this conclusion, but could not avoid it. It could not order a retrial.
Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 35(1)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Panton and others v Financial Institutions Services Ltd [2002] UKPC 86
15 Dec 2003
PC

Criminal Practice
(Jamaica) The appellants faced both civil and criminal proceedings. They sought a stay of the civil proceedings pending the disposal of the civil proceedings. They appealeed a saying that the rule in Smith v Selwyn applied. Held: The rule is no longer part of the common law, and nor was it part of the law of Jamaica. Appeal denied.
The defendants challenged disciplinary proceedings against them saying that there were also criminal proceedings, which must be given priority. Did the rule in Smith v Selwyn still apply in Jamaica?
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Kent Pharmaceuticals Ltd, (Regina on the Application of ) v Serious Fraud Office and Another [2003] EWHC 3002 (Admin); Times, 06 January 2004
17 Dec 2003
Admn
The Honourable Mr Justice Maurice Kay The Honourable Mr Justice Mackay
Police, Criminal Practice, Judicial Review, Human Rights
The claimant sought judicial review of the decision of the respondent to disclose documents obtained by it from them during an investigation. Held: The decisions to disclose material to the DoH were "in accordance with law" within the meaning of Article 8(2), notwithstanding the width of the discretion conferred by section 3(5)(a). The claimant should have been allowed opportunity to make representations before disclosure, and the disclosure was unfair, but in the circumstances no damages were to be awarded.
Criminal Justice Act 1987 2(5) - Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 19 - European Convention on Human Rights 8(3)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Dawson and Others, Regina (on the Application Of) v Crown Court at Newcastle Upon Tyne [2003] EWHC 3297 (Admin)
19 Dec 2003
Admn

Criminal Practice

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina on the Application of South West Yorkshire Mental Health NHS Trust v Crown Court at Bradford [2003] EWCA Civ 1857; Times, 23 January 2004; [2004] 1 WLR 1664; [2004] 1 All ER 1311,
19 Dec 2003
CA
Lord Justice Chadwick Lord Justice May Lord Justice Pill
Health, Crime, Criminal Practice
A appealed an order made by the Crown Court under the 1964 Act for his detention in a mental hospital on the grounds that he was unfit to enter a plea to the charge of murder. Held: The Court of Appal had no jurisdiction to hear the appeal. All appeals from orders of the Crown Court not involving a conviction were to the Queens Bench Division. The orders were not in any sense merely collateral, and a criminal trial remained a possibility.
Criminal Procedures (Insanity and Unfitness to Plead) Act 1991 - Supreme Court Act 1981 18(1)(a)
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.