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: 2004 To: 2004
This page lists 118 cases, and was prepared on 21 May 2019.
Regina v G [2004] 1 WLR 2932
2004
CACD
Rose LJ
Criminal Practice
1 Citers
Attorney General's Reference (No 19 of 2004) (Charlton) [2004] EWCA Crim 1239
2004
CACD
Latham LJ
Criminal Practice
The sentencing judge had indicated in chambers to defence counsel, that he was minded not to impose a custodial sentence if a plea was entered to a mooted charge. Prosecuting counsel was present but did not contribute to the discussion although he said while leaving chambers, "Your Honour, it sounds, therefore, as if the matter can be resolved". When the Attorney General sought an increase in the sentence, defence counsel said it would be an abuse for the Attorney General, standing in the shoes of the prosecution, to suggest that the course in which the prosecution had acquiesced was inappropriate on the basis that it would result in a sentence which was unduly lenient. Counsel relied on the decision in Attorney General's Reference (Nos 8, 9 and 10 of 2002) Held: "It seems to us that the passage upon which Miss Munro relies is a passage which must be considered with some care. It clearly has to be read in conjunction with what Lord Bingham said in Robinson and what Rose LJ said in Stokes. It is undoubtedly right that if the prosecution has acted in ways in which it could be said that it had played a part in giving the offender the relevant expectation, then clearly it would not be appropriate for this court to permit the Attorney General to argue that the sentence which was imposed, partly as a result of what the prosecution had said or done, was unduly lenient. But we have, it seems to us, to look in the light of that principle at the facts of each particular case."
1 Citers
Regina (Bannister) v Guildford Crown Court [2004] EWHC 221 (Admin)
2004
Admn
Criminal Practice
Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 22(3)
1 Citers
Regina v Smolinksi [2004] 2 Cr App R 661
2004
CACD
Criminal Practice
1 Citers
Crawford v Washington (2004) 541 US 36
2004
Scalia J
International, Criminal Practice
(US Supreme Court) The Court examined the historical background to the Sixth Amendment. Held: The principal evil against which it was directed "was the civil-law mode of criminal procedure, and particularly its use of ex parte examinations as evidence against the accused." Hence it was aimed at an accuser who made a formal statement to government officers.
1 Citers
Regina v Gray [2004] EWCA Crim 1074
2004
CACD
Rix LJ
Criminal Practice
The court gave guidance on appropriate good character directions where a defendant had old convictions.
1 Citers
Regina v Allan; CACD 2004 - [2004] EWCA Crim 2236
Regina v L,G,Q and M [2004] EWCA Crim 1579
2004
Criminal Practice
1 Citers
Regina v Smolinski [2004] 2 Cr App R 40
2004
CACD
Criminal Practice
When a defendant argues for an abuse of process from delay, the court should make its ruling only after the close of the prosecution case, when the effect of the delay may be properly understood. A stay should be exceptional.
1 Citers
SC v United Kingdon [2004] 40 EHRR 10
2004
ECHR
Human Rights, Criminal Practice
SC when aged 11 was charged with attempted robbery. He had previous convictions, and was committed to the crown court for trial. He applied to stay the proceedings as an abuse of process on account of limited intellectual capacity, and inability effectively to take part in a trial. It was not said that he was unfit to plead, but that a crown court trial would be a breach of his Article 6 Convention rights. He was tried and convicted; his appeal to the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) failed. Held: SC's Article 6 rights had been breached if he had been unable effectively to participate in his trial. The Court described 'effective participation' in a trial: "However, "effective participation" in this context presupposes that the accused has a broad understanding of the nature of the trial process and of what is at stake for him or her, including the significance of any penalty which may be imposed. It means that he or she, if necessary with the assistance of, for example, an interpreter, lawyer, social worker or friend, should be able to understand the general thrust of what is said in court. The defendant should be able to follow what is said by the prosecution witness and, if represented, to explain to his own lawyers his version of events, point out any statements with which he disagrees and make them aware of any facts which should be put forward in his defence."
European Convention on Human Rights 6
1 Citers
Regina v G and B [2004] 2 Cr App R 37; [2004] EWCA 1368
2004
CACD
Rose LJ
Criminal Practice, Legal Professions
Rose LJ said: "Both in principle and pragmatically, whether a solicitor or barrister can properly continue to act is a matter for him or her and not the court, although of course the court can properly make observations on the matter".
1 Citers
Regina v Gill [2004] EWCA Crim 3245
2004
CACD
Criminal Practice
Police officers had continued the interview of a suspect despite it becoming clear that he suffered mental inapacity. The trial judge having heard an application to have the interview excluded at an early point and only gave his reasons much later, after all the evidence was heard, and he sought to justify his decision upon the basis of evidence arising in the trial which could not have influenced the decision he had taken earlier. Held: The judgment was criticised. The absence of culpability on the part of the police is not determinative since a confession may prove to be unreliable notwithstanding. Evidence as to unreliability might emerge later (for instance subsequent medical evidence as to incapacity) but it will be relevant evidence because it pertains to the circumstances prevailing at the time of the confession.
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 74
1 Citers
Jennings v Crown Prosecution Service [2004] 4 All ER 391
2004
Criminal Practice
1 Citers
Practice Direction (Criminal Proceedings: Costs) [2004] 1 WLR 2657
2004
Criminal Practice, Costs
"Where a person is not tried for an offence for which he has been indicted, or in respect of which proceedings against him have been sent for trial or transferred for trial, or has been acquitted on any count in the indictment, the court may make a defendant's costs order in his favour. Such an order should normally be made whether or not an order for costs between the parties is made, unless there are positive reasons for not doing so. For example, where the defendant's own conduct has brought suspicion on himself and has misled the prosecution into thinking that the case against him was stronger than it was, the defendant can be left to pay his own costs. The court when declining to make a costs order should explain, in open court, that the reason for not making an order does not involve any suggestion that the defendant is guilty of any criminal conduct but the order is refused because of the positive reason that should be identified."
1 Citers
Regina v Edwards [2004] EWCA Crim 2102
2004
CACD
Criminal Practice
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. It is not the law that the prosecution must exclude all other possible inferences.
1 Cites
Aryan v Department of Public Prosecutions [2004] EWHC 45 (Admin)
13 Jan 2004
Admn
May LJ, Harrison J
Criminal Practice
The defendant appealed against a refusal by the magistrates to allow him to re-open his mode of trial hearing so as to allow him to elect trial at the Crown Court. She was Iranian and non-English speaker, though with a translator. The magistrates had found that she had understood the nature and consequences of the decision she made.
Magistrates' Court Act 1980 17 18
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Regina v McKinnon Gazette, 25 March 2004
19 Jan 2004
CACD
Lord Justice Scott Baker, Mr Justice McKinnon and Judge Gordon
Criminal Practice
The defendant had taken obscene images within the UK, then exported them to the US where they were sold to subscribers, including subscribers within the UK. He appealed a confiscation order. Held: It was not necessary that the money be derived directly from criminal activity in the UK. A power of confiscation would arise in the US. The criminal conspiracy to publish an obscene article and its actual publication had taken place within the UK.
Criminal Justice Act 1988 71(4)
Regina v Angela Cannings [2004] EWCA Crim 1; [2004] 1 FCR 193; Gazette, 05 February 2004; [2004] 2 CAR 7
19 Jan 2004
CACD
Mrs Justice Rafferty Lord Justice Judge Mr Justice Pitchers
Criminal Practice
The defendant had been convicted of murdering her children. The substance of the evidence against her was that on a medical expert. His evidence was disputed and later doubted. Held: Appeal allowed. In general courts should be careful to convict solely on the basis of conflicting and disputed medical evidence.
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Government of India v Quattrocchi Times, 28 January 2004
20 Jan 2004
CA
Lord Philips of Worth Matravers, NT, Buxton, Keene LJJ
Criminal Practice, International
The defendant faced trial in India. The prosecutor obtained an order here restraining disposal of assets here pending the outcome of the criminal trial. Held: Where the conditions were met, an order could properly be made. The defendant, having been accused of fraud, had transferred 3 million pounds to a bank in England. Proceedings had been instituted and by a designated country. A confiscation would be available to the court in India, and a restraint order was proper here.
Criminal Justice Act 1988 76
Practice Direction (Bail: Failure to surrender and trials in absence) Times, 26 January 2004
22 Jan 2004
CACD
Lord Woolf LCJ
Criminal Practice
The court, amending the earlier direction, gave detailed guidance on how prosecutors and courts should deal with trials where defendants had failed to surrender to bail. Defendants must be made aware of the damage caused by failures to surrender.
Bail Act 1976 6(1) 6(2)
1 Cites
Regina v Betson; Regina v Cockran Times, 28 January 2004
22 Jan 2004
CACD
Rose LJ
Criminal Practice
The defendants complained that the judge had fallen asleep during counsels' speeches. The judge admitted this. Held: Whilst a judge should not do this the court should look to the effect on the particular trial, and beyond that mere fact. The summing up remained comprehensive balanced and otherwise adequate. No counsel had raised the issue at the time. Appeal dismissed.
Regina v Connor and another; Regina v Mirza; HL 22-Jan-2004 - [2004] UKHL 2; Times, 23 January 2004; [2004] 2 WLR 201; [2004] 1 AC 1118; [2004] HRLR 11; 16 BHRC 279; [2004] 2 Cr App R 8; [2004] 1 All ER 925
Regina v Webber; HL 22-Jan-2004 - [2004] UKHL 1; Times, 23 January 2004; [2004] 1 WLR 404
Regina v Alamin Miah and Maruf Uddin [2004] EWCA Crim 63
28 Jan 2004
CA
Mrs Justice Rafferty Lord Justice Mantell Mr Justice Pitchers
Criminal Practice
Regina (Aru) v Chief Constable of Merseyside Police Times, 05 February 2004; [2004] 1 WLR 1697
30 Jan 2004
CA
Waller, Longmore, Maurice Kay, LJJ
Criminal Practice, Police, Judicial Review
The applicant had been cautioned by the police. The victim sought judicial review of that decision. The respondent now appealed. Held: The court of appeal had no jurisdiction to hear an appeal against a judicial review in a criminal matter where there had been a final disposal of the matter. Any appeal must be to the House of Lords. The police caution operated as such, and no review would lay. The section referred to a criminal 'cause or matter' not to proceedings. An official caution appeared to be a way of disposing of a complaint.
Maurice Kay LJ noted the use of the phrase 'criminal cause or matter' denoted a "wider ambit" than merely "criminal proceedings".
Public Order Act 1986 5 - Supreme Court Act 1981 18(1) - Administration of Justice Act 1960 1(1)
1 Cites
1 Citers
Regina v Haynes Times, 27 February 2004
2 Feb 2004
CACD
Woolf LCJ, Richards, Henriques JJ
Criminal Practice
In a difficult case, the judge asked for the assistance of counsel in the absence of the jury, but declined assistance in connection with his proposed Turnbull direction. That direction was then said to be defective. Held: A wise judge makes it clear that he welcomes assistance from counsel, and it was counsel's duty to give assistance.
1 Cites
Regina v H; Regina v C; HL 5-Feb-2004 - [2004] UKHL 3; Times, 06 February 2004; Gazette, 26 February 2004; [2004] 2 AC 134; [2004] 2 WLR 335; [2004] HRLR 20; [2004] 2 Cr App R 10; [2004] 1 All ER 1269; [2004] 16 BHRC 332
O'Donoghue, Re Criminal Justice Act 1988 [2004] EWHC 176 (Admin)
10 Feb 2004
Admn
Criminal Practice
In its definition of realisable property, section 74(1) does not confine it to property held when the confiscation order was made.
Criminal Justice Act 1988 74(1)
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Regina v Kadiu Times, 18 February 2004
10 Feb 2004
CACD
Judge LJ
Criminal Practice
The defendant appealed his conviction. At trial he had had the assistance of an interpreter. Held: Whoever signs the leave to application for leave to appeal must indicate in every case where an interpreter had been used. The failure to do so had caused an unnecesary adjournment.
Practice Direction (Crown court: Guidance to Jurors) Times, 27 February 2004; [2004] 1 WLR 665
23 Feb 2004
CACD
Woolf LCJ
Criminal Practice
Where jurors had concerns about the behaviour of fellow jurors, they should bring these to the attention of the judge during the trial rather than after. Jurors should be told of this, but not in such a way as to encourage inappropriate criticism of fellow jurors. "IV.42.6 Trial judges should ensure that the jury is alerted to the need to bring any concerns about fellow jurors to the attention of the judge at the time, and not wait until the case is concluded. At the same time, it is undesirable to encourage inappropriate criticism of fellow jurors, or to threaten jurors with contempt of court. IV.42.7 Judges should therefore take the opportunity, when warning the jury of the importance of not discussing the case with anyone outside the jury, to add a further warning. It is for the trial judge to tailor the further warning to the case, and to the phraseology used in the usual warning. The effect of the further warning should be that it is the duty of jurors to bring to the judge's attention, promptly, any behaviour among the jurors or by others affecting the jurors, that causes concern. The point should be made that, unless that is done while the case is continuing, it may be impossible to put matters right."
1 Cites
1 Citers
Regina (Gibson and Another) v Winchester Crown Court Times, 09 March 2004; [2004] EWHC 361 (Admin); Gazette, 18 March 2004; [2004] 1 WLR 1623
24 Feb 2004
QBD
Lord Woolf LCJ, Rose LJ, Royce J
Criminal Practice
The defendant challenged extension of the custody time limit, saying that the prosecuting authorities had not acted with due diligence to take the case forward. Held: Though the prosecutor had not acted as required, in this case the actual reason for the delay lay at the feet of the court, and the prosecution's failure had not contributed. Accordingly the court could extend the custody time limit.
Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 22(3)
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Practice Direction (Court of Appeal, Criminal Division: Listing) Times, 10 March 2004
8 Mar 2004
Lord Woolf LCJ
Criminal Practice
Counsel must give priority to a listing in the Court of Appeal over a commitment in a lower court.
1 Cites
Sheikh and Others, Regina v [2004] EWCA Crim 492
8 Mar 2004
CACD
Criminal Practice
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Regina v Sheikh, Sheikh and Sheikh [2004] EWCA (Crim) 492
8 Mar 2004
CACD
Mr Justice Butterfield Lord Justice Mantell
Criminal Practice
For an appeal to succeed in respect of a trial judge's exercise of discretion to refuse a change of plea from Guilty to Not Guilty: "It must be shown that the judge misdirected himself or took account of matters which he should not have taken account of or failed to take account of matters to which he should have had regard or that he exercised his discretion in a wholly unreasonable manner."
1 Citers
Regina v Evans Times, 22 March 2004
9 Mar 2004
CACD
Woolf LJC, Judge LJ, Rafferty J
Criminal Practice
The defendant appealed his sentence. Held: The judge had imposed an extended licence period without this being discussed first with counsel so as to allow representations to be made. This was wrong, but such an order would not always be quashed on this sole ground.
Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 85
Regina v Stanton Times, 28 April 2004
10 Mar 2004
CACD
Hedley J
Criminal Practice
In the course of the defendant's trial issues of identification arose. The defendant appealed. Held: The judge failed to draw to the attention of the jury any specific weaknesses in the identification evidence as required in Turnbull. It was a specific requirement in even the shortest trial where an issue as to identification arose. The judge would have done better to discuss the matter with counsel when no doubt he would have been reminded of his obligation.
1 Cites
Regina v Dundon Times, 18 March 2004; [2004] EWCA Crim 621
18 Mar 2004
CMAC
Mr Justice Douglas Brown Mr Justice Newman Lord Justice Rose VP
Armed Forces, Criminal Practice, Human Rights
The defendant had been convicted under a system of trial later confirmed not to be compliant with the need for a fair trial. Held: The judge advocate in this trial had been a serving officer. Unless the positive obligation to show an independent tribunal could be shown, a trial could not normally be shown to be fair. There was no criticism of the judge advocate, but the trial was unfair as a matter of principle and authority. Other appeals out of time might not be allowed.
Naval Discipline Act 1957 11
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Regina (M) v Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs and Lord Chancellor [2004] EWCA Civ 312; Times, 31 March 2004; [2004] 1 WLR 2298
18 Mar 2004
CA
Lord Justice Kennedy Lord Phillips Of Worth Matravers, Mr Lord Justice Neuberger
Human Rights, Criminal Practice
The making of an interim Anti-Social Behaviour Order not on notice was not an infringement of the subject's human rights, since the order was limited in time and subject to review by the courts. However, "The more intrusive the order the more the court will require proof that it is necessary that it should be made, and made in the particular form sought, but there is nothing intrinsically objectionable about the power to grant an interim ASBO without notice." The test to be adopted by a Magistrates' Court, when deciding whether or not to make an interim order, must be the statutory test, whether it is just to make the order. That itself involves consideration of all relevant circumstances including the fact that the application has been made without notice. The court must consider whether the application for the final order has been properly made, but there is no justification for requiring the Magistrates' Court, when considering whether to make an interim order, to decide whether the evidence in support of the full order discloses an extremely strong prima facie case.
Crime and Disorder Act 1998 1D
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Regina v Mullen [2004] EWCA Crim 602; Times, 19 April 2004
19 Mar 2004
CACD
Mr Justice Astill Mr Justice Hooper Lord Justice Potter
Criminal Practice
The defendant said that since the evidence in chief of child prosecution witnesses had been recorded and made available to jurors, facility ought also to be provided for the recording of the cross examination of the same witness so that the jurors might have that evidence re-inforced also. Held: No general rule was required for this purpose. The section gave appropriate powers to the judge to exercise.
Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 28
[ Bailii ]
A (A Child), Regina (on the Application of) v Leeds Magistrate's Court and Another [2004] EWHC 554 (Admin); Times, 31 March 2004
19 Mar 2004
Admn
Criminal Practice, Magistrates
The father sought judicial review of an anti-social behaviour order (ASBO) made in respect of his son. Held: Although the child's best interests remained a primary consideration when making such an order, they were not the primary consideration. Where it was not alleged that the behaviour did not justify an order and application for judicial review was inappropriate.
Crime and Disorder Act 1998 1D
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Regina v Martin (Durwayne) Times, 08 June 2004
25 Mar 2004
CACD
Rose LJ, Crane, Hunt JJ
Criminal Practice
The defendant, accused of a sexual offence, wished to assert in his defence that the complainant had pestered him for sex, and to question her on this. The judge had not allowed the questions to be put, being questions about her previous sexual behaviour. Held: Where the purpose of the questioning was to undermine the complainant's credibility, cross examination should be refused. Where the purpose was to strengthen the defence case, then the judge had then to ask whether a refusal to allow the questioning would render the trial unfair. In this case the defendant had chosen in any event not to give evidence, and the judge would properly have directed the jury to disregard answers to the questions if put. Appeal dismissed.
Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 41
Thompson v Regina; CACD 26-Mar-2004 - [2004] EWCA Crim 669; Times, 16 April 2004
Rezvi, Re the Criminal Justice Act 1988 [2004] EWHC 621 (Admin)
29 Mar 2004
Admn
Criminal Practice, Costs
Criminal Justice Act 1988
[ Bailii ]
Lappin, Regina (on the Application Of) v Hm Customs and Excise [2004] EWHC 953 (Admin)
30 Mar 2004
Admn
Criminal Practice
Drug Trafficking Act 1994 42
[ Bailii ]
Regina v Alibhai and Others [2004] EWCA Crim 681
30 Mar 2004
CACD
Longmore LJ, Silber, Andrew Smith JJ
Criminal Practice
The defendants appealed against their convictions for conspiracy to manufacture and distribute counterfeit Microsoft products. They said that inadequate disclosure had been provided by Microsoft. The principal witness was a participating informant whose evidence had contained many demonstrable lies. Held: Longmore LJ said: "the Crown does have obligations in respect of material in the hands of third parties and a conviction would, in any event, be unsafe if the absence of disclosure of material in the possession of a third party meant that an accused could not have a fair trial." Microsoft had given incorrect information about their involvement with the lying witness. They agreed to give full disclosure, but never did. The judge had made a formal order to solicitors acting for Microsoft for further discovery. Microsoft had done the minimum required to co-operate by the judge considered that a fair trial remained possible. The prosecution evidence case consisted of rather more than the evidence of the challenged witness. The conviction was safe.
Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 81 - Criminal Procedure (Attendance of Witnesses) Act 1965 2 - Indictments Act 1915 5
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Regina on the Application of S v Waltham Forest Youth Court, The Crown Prosecution Service, The Secretary of State for the Home Department; Admn 31-Mar-2004 - [2004] 2 Cr App R 335; [2004] EWHC 715 (Admin)
Regina v Jisi; Regina v Tekin Times, 19 April 2004; [2004] EWCA Crim 696
1 Apr 2004
CACD
Judge LJ, Nelson, McCombe JJ
Criminal Practice
The defendants appealed convictions for fraudulent evasion of the prohibition of importing of certain goods. Held: The defendant had produced at trial a bunch of 400 pages of evidence which had not been disclosed to the prosecution. He had contributed to the need for detailed and protracted cross examination. Ways of saving time needed to be canvassed including the courts taking active case management whilst being fair to the parties.
[ Bailii ]
Regina v Hoare and Pierce [2004] EWCA Crim 784
2 Apr 2004
CACD
Lord Justice Auld Mr Justice Forbes
Criminal Practice
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 accepted, an accused has remained silent not because of that advice but because he had no or no satisfactory explanation to give. For this purpose, but only for this purpose, section 34 in its provision for the drawing of an adverse inference qualifies a defendants right to silence."
Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 34
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Regina v Rafferty (WA); Regina v Rafferty (WK) Times, 21 April 2004; [2004] EWCA Crim 968
5 Apr 2004
CACD
Rose VP LJ, Crane, Hunt JJ
Criminal Practice
The defendants appealed, saying the jury verdicts were not consistent. Held: Counsel presenting such an appeal should ensure that the transcripts of the cases now cited were put before the court. To have a verdict set aside for inconsistency there had to be a logical inconsistency. That had not been shown.
The appellants sought to appeal their convictions for affray.
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Regina (O) v Coventry Magistrates Court Times, 22 April 2004; [2004] EWHC 905 (Admin); [2004] ACD 50
5 Apr 2004
QBD
Gage J, Keith J
Criminal Evidence, Criminal Practice
The defendant was charged with incitement to distribute indecent images of children. He complained that the evidence relied upon were print-outs of pages on a web-site, being hearsay, and inadmissible as evidence not merely of the computer but of a human mind entering the information. Held: The evidence was admissible as real evidence, applying Spiby. At this stage the prosecutor had only to establish a prima facie case. This was not a case where the defendant was being accused of inciting a computer, but rather of using the computer to incite another to provide the service.
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Regina (Denny) v Acton Youth Court Times, 03 June 2004; [2004] EWHC 948 (Admin)
21 Apr 2004
Admn
Maurice Kay LJ, Crane J
Criminal Practice, Magistrates
The defendant had been committed by the Youth Court to the magistrates court for sentence for attempted robbery. At the time of the offence he had been 17, but on conviction he had attained 18. The district judge had declared that he had no jurisdiction. Held: The offence could only be tried in the Crown court, and therefore the magistrates could only remit him to the crown court for sentence for an indictable only offence..
Powers of Criminal Court (Sentencing) Act 2000 9(1)
[ Bailii ]
X, Re [2004] EWHC 861 (Admin)
22 Apr 2004
Admn
Criminal Practice
Criminal Justic Act 1988
[ Bailii ]
In re X (Restraint Order: Payment out) Times, 03 June 2004
22 Apr 2004
QBD
David J
Criminal Practice
A restraint order had been made in respect of the defendant's assets pending trial. Application was made to release a sum to pay the defendant's company debts. Held: A payment could be made only where the the realisable value of the property restrained was not reduced. This was not such a case.
Criminal Justice Act 1988
1 Cites
Kansal v The United Kingdom 21413/02; Times, 29 April 2004; [2004] ECHR 179; [2004] ECHR 181; [2010] ECHR 1872
27 Apr 2004
ECHR
Human Rights, Criminal Practice
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1 ; Pecuniary damage - claim rejected ; Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient ; Costs and expenses (Convention proceedings) - claim rejected
The claimant had been obliged to answer question put to him by the Official Receiver. He now objected that the subsequent use of those answers in a criminal trial was unfair. Held: The transcript of his interview was put before the jury and described as potentially important. They were significant. The House of Lords had rejected his objection on the basis that the trial predated the UK Act. The act infringed his right not to be obliged to incriminate himself, and had deprived him of a fair hearing.
Human Rights Act 1998
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
In re McFarland [2004] UKHL 17; Times, 30 April 2004; [2004] 1 WLR 1289
29 Apr 2004
HL
Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Steyn, Lord Scott of Foscote, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe
Criminal Practice
The claimant was convicted, imprisoned, and then his conviction was overturned. He sought compensation. He had pleaded guilty after being told by counsel to expect an adverse direction from the magistrate, following a meeting in private between counsel and the judge. His case had been overturned because he had been warned to expect a sentence more severe than could have been imposed. Held: A balance was to be found when compensating a defendant who was found not guilty or had his conviction overturned. A claim dould not be made here under s133, since it was not clear that there had been any miscarriage of justice. A judge or resident magistrate is a public servant, which is true, and to say that each is a member of the court to which he or she belongs. However at the time of the ministerial statements upon which the claim was made, a magistrate would not be seen as a member of a public authority, and therefore no claim for compensation would lie.
Criminal Appeal (Northern Ireland) Act 1980 14(1)(a) - Criminal Justice Act 1988 133(1) - International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 14(6)
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ House of Lords ] - [ Bailii ]
Mullen, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; HL 29-Apr-2004 - [2004] UKHL 18; Times, 03 May 2004; [2005] 1 AC 1; [2004] 3 All ER 65; [2004] 2 WLR 1140; 16 BHRC 469; [2004] UKHRR 745
Regina v Smolenski Times, 28 May 2004
4 May 2004
CACD
Lord Woolf LCJ, Aikens, Fulford JJ
Criminal Practice
The defendant complained that the long delay in his prosecution for alleged sexual assaults was an abuse. Held: Complaints about delays should normally be dealt with by the court of trial having heard the evidence. It was in the nature of allegations of sexual assault by children, that the courage to complain might only come with adulthood, and so delay was natural. A complaint of abuse of process will only succeed in exceptional cases. The judge should assess after hearing evidence whether it was approriate to go ahead, and should carefully scrutinise the evidence to make sure it could safely be left to a jury. Here, and referring also to some inconsistency in the verdicts, the conviction was unsafe.
1 Cites
Lobban, Regina v [2004] EWCA Crim 1099; [2001] 1 Cr App R 16; [2001] Crim LR 225
7 May 2004
CACD
Criminal Practice
The defendant appealed his conviction. A witness statement had been read, but he had wanted to cross examine her. The court was satisfied that her refusal to give evidence in person was through fear. Held: In making the decision, the judge had incorrectly said that her evidence was uncontested. The errors began with discussions in the judge's chambers without a shorthand note taker. That practice was to be deprecated. The defendant had a right to be present during his whole trial. The judge had not followed the correct procedure, and the defendant had been unable to test the assertions made. "whenever dealing with witnesses who may genuinely be frightened the court must act with sensitivity and care whilst simultaneously ensuring that the defendant's right to a fair trial is not eroded. When the relevant witness is called to give evidence of his fear, in our view the normal course of events will be for counsel on both sides to conduct the questioning in the usual way. " In this case the defence had not had proper opportunity, and the appeal succeeded.
Criminal Justice Act 1988 23
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Tolan, Re an Application for Judicial Review [2004] NIQB 29
14 May 2004
QBNI
Campbell LJ and Higgins J
Criminal Practice
The applicant faced a a criminal trial, and sought now to restrain the presentation of a report before Parliament which, he said, would prejudice the trial.
[ Bailii ]
Practice Direction (Criminal Proceedings: Consolidation) Times, 20 May 2004; [2004] 1 WLR 589
18 May 2004
Criminal Practice
cs When a defendant has been convicted of a Bail Act offence, the court should review the remand status of the defendant, including the conditions of that bail, in respect of the main proceedings for which bail had been granted.
Failure by the defendant to surrender or a conviction for failing to surrender to bail in connection with the main proceedings will be a significant factor weighing against the regranting of bail or, in the case of offences which do not normally give rise to a custodial sentence, in favour of trial in the absence of the offender.
Whether or not an immediate custodial sentence has been imposed for the Bail Act offence, the court may, having reviewed the defendant's remand status, also remand the defendant in custody in the main proceedings."
1 Citers
Regina v Salisbury; 19-May-2004 - Unreported, 19 May 2004
Regina v Arnold [2004] EWCA (Crim) 1293
21 May 2004
CACD
Hooper LJ, Leveson, Mettyear JJ
Criminal Practice, Human Rights
The defendant appealed a conviction after the non attendance of a witness. Held: The court was prepared to assume that the witness had not been kept away by fear, but ruled that the statement was admissible. However: "We cannot leave this case without sound a word of caution. The reference in Luca to the not infrequent occurrence of the phenomenon of frightened witnesses being unwilling to give evidence in trials concerning Mafia-type organisations is echoed across a wider range of serious crime in this country. Counsel both confirmed that this problem was becoming commonplace and the experience of the members of this Court concerned with the conduct of criminal trials is likewise. Inevitably, applications under section 23 will follow but this judgment should not be read as a licence for prosecutors. Very great care must be taken in each and every case to ensure that attention is paid to the letter and spirit of the Convention and judges should not easily be persuaded that it is in the interests of justice to permit evidence to be read. Where that witness provides the sole or determinative evidence against the accused, permitting it to be read may well, depending on the circumstances, jeopardise infringing the defendant's Article 6(3)(d) rights; even it is not the only evidence, care must be taken to ensure that the ultimate aim of each and every trial, namely, a fair hearing, is achieved."
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
J v Director of Public Prosecutions [2004] EWHC 1470 (Admin)
21 May 2004
Admn
Criminal Practice
[ Bailii ]
Regina v McConnell [2004] EWCA Crim 1358
21 May 2004
CACD
Criminal Practice
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Spooner, Eric Charles v Regina; (Evidence: Sex abuse) [2004] EWCA Crim 1320
25 May 2004
CACD
Mr Justice Holland Lord Justice Thomas His Honour Judge Michael Baker QC
Criminal Practice
The defendant appealed his convictions for child sex abuse, involving assault, rape and buggery, saying that evidence of a recent complaint by a schoolgirl friend of the complainant which was not consistent with other evidence of the complainant should not have been admitted. Held: Evidence of the mere fact of a complaint may only ever be admissible in very unusual circumstances and only then if a very careful direction is given: "admitting only evidence of the fact of the complaint would be to deny to a jury direct evidence as to the circumstances and nature of the contemporaneous complaint and to invite speculation". In earlier cases, the court was dealing with complaints of recent abuse, not as here. Admissibility depends on established principles, on whether such evidence is sufficiently consistent to support or enhance the credibility of the complainant. Then it is for the jury, properly directed, to consider whether the evidence of the complaint supports the complainant's evidence and what weight they consider should be attached to it in their assessment of the credit of the complainant. Nevertheless, the court had in this case failed to direct the jury as to the differences between the other complaint and the evidence of the complainant, and the conviction was unsafe.
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Regina v G and Another (PII: Counsel's duty) [2004] 1 WLR 2932; Times, 08 June 2004
27 May 2004
CACD
Rose LJ, Cresswell , Andrew Smith JJ
Criminal Practice, Legal Professions
During the course of the trial, the prosecutor had inadvertently disclosed to the defence legal team material which had been subject to a public interest immunity certificate. The judge made an order under the 1987 Act that the defence team must not disclose the materials to their clients, nor use it for their defence. Held: The jury having been discharged on the discovery, what then happened was a preparatory hearing, and there did exist a right of appeal. The judge had correctly seen the order as ancillary to the original PII certificate order. He had considered that the material would not impede the conduct of the defence. However, such an order would lead to several substantial practical difficulties and dangers for the defence lawyers. An asymmetric Chinese Wall between some defendants and their counsel and others would create an unfairness. This was reflected already in the documents submitted on the appeal. The judge could not conclude that the legal team could not properly continue to act. That was a decision for them, not him. If such orders were possible the special counsel procedures approved in R v H would not be required. Appeal allowed.
Rose LJ identified the inevitable damage to the relationship between the lawyer of revealing information to the lawyer on condition that it not be passed to the client: ". . . in addition to preventing frankness and fettering the free flow of information between lawyer and client, the order would be likely to nurture in the client a belief that his lawyers are putting other interests . . . above his own; and the client's perception of the relationship is a matter of importance . . ."
Criminal Justice Act 1987 9(11)
1 Cites
1 Citers
Regina v B and G; Re Interlocutory Application [2004] EWCA Crim 1368; [2004] 1 WLR 2932
27 May 2004
CACD
Rose LJ
Criminal Practice
Rose LJ considered the obligation on a court to accept a lawyer's view as to whether the continued representation of a criminal client would cause professional embarassment: "We think it right, both in principle and pragmatically, that whether a solicitor or barrister can properly continue to act is a matter for him or her, not the court, although of course the court can properly make observations on the matter . . Absent exceptional circumstances, such as an obvious attempt by a defendant to abuse the system by repeated applications, we think it is unlikely that, if leading counsel tells a judge that he is embarrassed to continue acting, the judge will not permit a change of representation."
[ Bailii ]
Le Petit v The United Kingdom 35574/97; Times, 09 July 2004; [2004] ECHR 258
15 Jun 2004
ECHR
Human Rights, Armed Forces, Criminal Practice
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
Naval Discipline Act 1957
1 Cites
[ Worldlii ] - [ Bailii ]
G.W. v The United Kingdom 34155/96; Times, 09 July 2004; [2004] ECHR 255; [2004] ECHR 255
15 Jun 2004
ECHR
Human Rights, Armed Forces, Criminal Practice
Hudoc 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
Naval Discipline Act 1957
1 Cites
[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
Thompson v The United Kingdom 36256/97; [2004] ECHR 267; [2004] ECHR 267
15 Jun 2004
ECHR
Human Rights, Armed Forces, Criminal Practice
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
1 Citers
[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
Hassan v Regina [2004] EWCA Crim 1478
17 Jun 2004
CACD
Mr Justice Royce Lord Justice Thomas
Criminal Practice
Failure to hold an identification parade
[ Bailii ]
Regina v Mitchell; CACD 21-Jun-2004 - Times, 08 July 2004
Regina v Brady Times, 09 July 2004; [2004] 3 All E R 520; [2004] 1 WLR 3240; [2005] 1 All ER (Comm) 328; [2004] All ER (D) 234; [2005] 1 Lloyds Rep 383
22 Jun 2004
CACD
Tuckey LJ, Douglas Brown, Hedley JJ
Criminal Practice
The defendant appeal against a conviction for cheating the revenue after the use of evidence obtained against him by compulsion in investigations under the Insolvency Act. Held: The information obtained in an investigation would normally be considered confidential, but had been used to obtain warrants and to lay informations: "It is self-evidently in the public interest that the appropriate prosecuting authority should have such material to aid its investigation which might well be considerably hampered by any requirements to obtain court approval or to give notice to the person who had provided the material."
Information obtained by the use of compulsory means is confidential in the sense that it may only be used for the purposes for which it was obtained. By the time of the trial, the use of such material would be unlawful and they were not admitted. The judge refused a stay on the basis that the prosecution remained an abuse of process. Disclosure by the investigators to other authorities was permitted without notifying the defendant and without his consent or the consent of another court. There was ample additional evidence to support the conviction, and the appeal was refused.
Insolvency Act 1986 132 235
O, Regina (on the Application Of) v Stratford Youth Court [2004] EWHC 1553 (Admin)
23 Jun 2004
Admn
Criminal Practice
[ Bailii ]
Makin, Regina v [2004] EWCA Crim 1607
23 Jun 2004
CACD
Hooper, Leveson LJJ, Mettyear HHJ
Criminal Practice
The complaint was of a failure of disclosure at trial, and disclosure pending appeal was necessary to enable the complaint to be investigated by the court.
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Assets Recovery Agency v Customs and Excise and others [2004] EWHC 1821 (Admin)
12 Jul 2004
Admn
Criminal Practice, Litigation Practice
Civil action to recover proceeds of drugs crime for the assets recovery agency
[ Bailii ]
Irwin, Regina (on the Application of) v Sutton Magistrates' Court [2004] EWHC 1820 (Admin)
13 Jul 2004
Admn
Criminal Practice
Appeal against the grant of an adjournment to the prosecution after they had failed to warn their witnesses to attend.
[ Bailii ]
Attorney General's Reference v Nos. 31, 45, 43, 42, 50 and 51 of 2003; Regina v McInerney; Regina v McLean; CACD 16-Jul-2004 - [2004] EWCA Crim 1934; Times, 20 July 2004
Jones and Milling, Olditch and Pritchard, and Richards v Gloucestershire Crown Prosecution Service [2004] EWCA Crim 1981; [2005] QB 259
21 Jul 2004
CACD
Lord Justice Latham Mr Justice Gibbs His Honour Judge Richard Brown Dl
Criminal Practice
The court considered the extent to which the defendants in the proceedings can rely on their beliefs as to the unlawfulness of the United Kingdom's actions in preparing for, declaring, and waging war in Iraq in 2003 in a defence to a charge of criminal damage. Held: International law was to be allowed for in national law. The rule of international law underlying the concept of the international crime of aggression is capable of having effect in domestic law, but not necessarily to create a crime of aggression here. Nevertheless, necessity might afford a defence to the defendants in the light of their beliefs, and the court will have to consider that. However, 'the question of the legality of the war in Iraq is not therefore a matter which arises in these cases.'
Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 - Criminal Damage Act 1971 - International Criminal Court Act 2001
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Government of the United States of America v Barnette and Montgomery (No 2); HL 22-Jul-2004 - [2004] UKHL 37; [2004] 4 All ER 289; [2004] 1 WLR 2241
Regina (Director of Public Prosecutions) v Camberwell Youth Court; Regina (H) v Camberwell Youth Court [2004] EWHC 1805 (Admin); Times, 12 August 2004
23 Jul 2004
QBD
Lord Justice Kennedy Mr Justice Treacy
Magistrates, Criminal Practice
The DPP sought directions as to the issuing of voluntary bills of indictment to have transferred to the Crown Court, allegations of robbery against youths between 12 and 14. Held: A child convicted of an offence for which an adult would receive a custodial sentence can receive a maximum youth training order of 24 months. Such an order is available for a child under 15 if he is a persistent offender. If the offence is grave, and an adult might be punished with 14 years or more, the Youth Court can transfer the case to the Crown Court which can order his detention to the same maximum as an adult. Because of the unfairnesses of the voulntary bill procedure, a prosecutor seeking to have a matter transferred to the Crown Court, should normally take the matter for judicial review.
Magistrates Courts Act 1980 24(1) - Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 91 100 101
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Regina v Hampton; Regina v Brown Times, 13 October 2004
30 Jul 2004
CACD
Hooper LJ, Aitkens, Fulford JJ
Criminal Practice
The defendant appealed his conviction, and sought to bring fresh evidence. Held: The evidence had been available to the defendant at trial, and a decision made that her inconsistencies made it unsafe to call her. The defendant would not now be allowed to call her on appeal.
Regina v Underwood; Regina v Arobieke; Regina v Khan; Regina v Connors Times, 01 September 2004
30 Jul 2004
CACD
Judge LJ, Douglas Brown, Bean JJ
Criminal Practice
In each case the appeal arose from difficulties with Newton Hearings, where the defendant had wished to plead guilty but on a different version of the facts from that proposed by the prosecution. Held: The court restated and emphasised the general guidance. So far as possible the facts upon which he should be sentenced should be the true facts. The responsibility for identifying differences began with the defence. Clear records should be kept, and it remained open to the judge to reject or accept any agreed version of the events, or to order a Newton Hearing. If a hearing was to take place it should do so immediately if possible, and the judge must be careful to ensure that he directs himself as he would a jury.
1 Cites
Regina v Coates; Regina v Graves; Regina v Terry Times, 24 August 2004; [2004] EWCA Crim 2253; [2004] 1 WLR 3043
30 Jul 2004
CACD
Judge LJ, Roderick Evans J, Pitchers J
Criminal Practice
Each defendant had appealed. The appeals had been heard but the decisions not announced. One of the judges, Lord Justice Kay died. Held: It was not open to the remaining judges to announce their decisions, whatever discussions had taken place before His Lordhsip's death. The jurisdiction of the court was statutory, and that jurisdiction required a court of three.
Supreme Court Act 1981 55
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Customs and Excise, Regina (on the Application Of) v Blackfriars Crown Court [2004] EWHC 2119 (Admin)
5 Aug 2004
Admn
Criminal Practice
Challenge to refusal of judge to release transcript of application for public interest immunity certificate.
[ Bailii ]
Armstrong, Regina (on the Application Of) v Crown Prosecution Service [2004] EWHC 2252 (Admin)
27 Aug 2004
Admn
Criminal Practice
Extension of custody time limits.
[ Bailii ]
W, Regina (on the Application of) v Camberwell Youth Court and Another [2004] EWHC 2211 (Admin)
10 Sep 2004
Admn
Collins J
Magistrates, Criminal Practice
The defendant sought a Judicial review of the magistrates' decision to adjourn case at request of prosecutor. The prosecutor had failed to comply with its disclosure obligations, and de-warned its witnesses before the date fixed for trial. Held: The justices' decision had been lawful. The defendant was unable to establish any prejudice to him in the adjournment beyond, which was not relevant, any lost opportunity to proceed without prosecution witnesses. To set such a decision aside the court would have to be faced with a decision which could not be supported or was irrational.
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Regina v Pollock; CANI 24-Sep-2004 - [2004] NICA 34
Regina (on the Application of) Snelgrove v the Crown Court at Woolwich, and the Crown Prosecution Service; Admn 29-Sep-2004 - [2004] EWHC 2172 (Admin); [2005] 1 Cr App R 18; [2005] 1 WLR 3223
In re S (Restraint Order) Times, 08 October 2004
1 Oct 2004
CACD
Criminal Practice
The Customs had obtained a restraint order over the applicant's assets pending its investigation of his affairs. He sought permission to use part of the money to pay the legal costs of legal advice and assistance with regard to the restraint order. Held: The section had been passed because assets had previously been substantially dissipated on proceedings challenging the restraint itself. The Act was clear, and public funding was now available for this purpose. Stringent supervision of such orders was necessary, and the order could not be varied.
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 41
McCubbin, Regina (on the Application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions [2004] EWHC 2504 (Admin)
12 Oct 2004
Admn
Magistrates, Criminal Practice
The defendant appealed by way of case stated against the decision of the magistrates to convict him of assault. Held: No point of law had been raised. The reasons given were adequate. In truth this was a challenge on the facts, and the defendant should have appealed to the Crown Court. Appeal dismissed.
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Attorney General's Reference (No 5 of 2002) [2004] UKHL 40; [2004] 4 All ER 901; [2005] 1 AC 167; [2004] 3 WLR 957
14 Oct 2004
HL
Lord Bingham Of Cornhill
Criminal Practice, Constitutional
The Attorney General sought the correct interpretation of section 17 where a court was asked as to whether evidence obtained from a telephone tapping had been taken from a public or private network. A chief constable suspected that the defendants, three of his officers, were selling confidential information to criminals. He ordered their telephones to be tapped. The resulting evidence was used in their trial. The systems tapped involved different networks of telephone systems, some private and some public. Held: The basic object of section 17 appears to be to preserve the secrecy of the warrant system. There was nothing in the 2000 Act to suggest a parliamentary intention to render inadmissible as evidence in criminal proceedings any material which had previously been admissible. The Act did not operate to make such material inadmissible. It was permissible for the court to ask as to the source of such telephone intercept materials.
Lord Steyn said that in view of the absurdity that would otherwise result, the House must not give its literal interpretation to a statutory provision which, literally read, precluded the defence from asking questions to establish that there had been interception (consequently illegal) on part of a public telecommunications system, but allowed the prosecution to call evidence to the effect that the interceptions had taken place wholly within a police private telecommunications system (and were therefore legal). The linguistic difficulty was "decisively outweighed by a purposive interpretation of the statute".
Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 17(1)
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ House of Lords ] - [ Bailii ]
Sheldrake v Director of Public Prosecutions; Attorney General's Reference No 4 of 2002 [2004] UKHL 43; [2005] 1 AC 264; Times, 14 October 2004; [2005] 1 All ER 237; [2004] 3 WLR 976; [2005] RTR 13; (2004) 168 JP 669; (2004) 17 BHRC 339; [2004] All ER (D) 169
14 Oct 2004
HL
Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Steyn, Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Carswell
Criminal Practice, Crime, Human Rights
Appeals were brought complaining as to the apparent reversal of the burden of proof in road traffic cases and in cases under the Terrorism Acts. Was a legal or an evidential burden placed on a defendant? Held: Lord Bingham of Cornhill said: "The overriding concern is that a trial should be fair, and the presumption of innocence is a fundamental right directed to that end. The Convention does not outlaw presumptions of fact or law but requires that these should be kept within reasonable limits and should not be arbitrary. It is open to states to define the constituent elements of a criminal offence, excluding the requirement of mens rea. But the substance and effect of any presumption adverse to a defendant must be examined, and must be reasonable."
The justifiability and fairness of such defences have to be judged in the particular context of each case. The defendant being found drunk in charge a car, he appealed a finding which relied upon his failure to prove his own intention not to drive. The burden of proof provision in section 5(2) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 imposes a legal burden on an accused who is charged with an offence contrary to section 5(1)(b) of that Act. The second defendant faced charges under the Terrorism Act 2000, of being a member of a proscribed organisation. The A G appealed his acquittal in the Court of Appeal. 'Section 11(1), considered on its own, is a provision of extraordinary breadth. It would cover a person who joined an organisation when it was not a terrorist organisation or when, if it was, he did not know that it was. It would cover a person who joined an organisation when it was not proscribed or, if it was, he did not know that it was. It would cover a person who joined such an organisation as an immature juvenile. It would cover someone who joined such an organisation abroad in a country where it was not prosribed and came to this country ignorant that it was proscribed here' Section 11(2) should be read down to impose only an evidential burden on a defendant.
Road Traffic Act 1988 5(2) - Terrorism Act 2000 11(2) - European Convention on Human Rights 6.2 - Human Rights Act 1998
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ House of Lords ] - [ Bailii ]
Director of Public Prosecutions v Ayres [2004] EWHC 2553 (Admin)
20 Oct 2004
Admn
Silber, Gibbs JJ
Criminal Practice
The prosecutor appealed a decision of the magistrates to dismiss the case for abuse of process, having failed to comply with several and repeated directions as to the management of the case. He said that he had not been given opportunity to make representations. Held: The prosecutor should have been given opportunity to make oral representations. However, the court expressed disquiet at the "extremely substantial periods of default in relation to each of the items in this case . . collectively they amount (not in the legal sense but in ordinary parlance) to a contempt for the directions of the magistrates. "
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Iqbal v Director of Public Prosecutions [2004] EWHC 2567 (Admin)
22 Oct 2004
Admn
Criminal Practice
Appeal against conviction for handling stolen goods - admission of statement made before officer formed suspicion of theft. The prosecution had first conducted their case on the footing that it had been the property of his employer, but then were unable to establish that. Held: Though the conversation should be admitted, the prosecution had failed to prove its case. Appeal allowed.
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 78
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
London Borough of Sutton v S [2004] EWHC 2876 (Admin)
26 Oct 2004
Admn
Thomas LJ, Fulford J
Education, Criminal Practice
The Borough appealed against acquittal by the magistrates of the defendant parent accused of failure to ensure the regular attendance of their child at school. The child had attended only irregularly. The parents had contacted the school and authorities and sought help and co-opertaed with the Borough, but their daughter had been unco-operative and eventually abusive. Held: The appeal failed. The very strict nature of the offence under section 444(1) is and has for some considerable time been considered of great importance to support the duty placed by section 7 of the Education Act 1996 upon parents. However, the case of Barnfather had emphasised the need for the use of discretion by authorities. It may have been proper to bring proceedings before the magistrates, but it should have been obvious that the appeal had no prospects of success and could only cause further distress for the family involved. In essence this was a question of fact, and the court had rejected the evidence of the Education Welfare Officer.
The court considered whether, the parents having been found not guilty of the greater offence, the magistrates should have convicted them under the lesser offence, saying: " It is important to stress that the public interest often requires that a person charged with a more serious offence should, if that is not made out, nonetheless be convicted of the lesser offence, if that is made out. The interests of justice are not served by acquittals in such circumstances. However, the test is the interests of justice." The matter should not be remitted.
Education Act 1996 444
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Richardson, Regina v [2004] EWCA Crim 2997
28 Oct 2004
CACD
Clarke LJ, Gibbs J, Stanley Burnton J
Criminal Practice
The defendant appealed against his convictions for rape, saying that one juror should have been disqualified being subject to a Community Rehabilitation Order, and therefore in effect on probation. Held: The appeal failed.
Juries Act 1974 1 18
[ Bailii ]
In re S (a Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication); HL 28-Oct-2004 - [2004] UKHL 47; Times, 29 October 2004; [2005] 1 FLR 591; [2005] 1 AC 593; 17 BHRC 646; [2004] 4 All ER 683; [2005] Crim LR 310; [2004] 3 FCR 407; [2005] HRLR 5; [2004] 3 WLR 1129; [2005] EMLR 11; [2005] UKHRR 129; [2005] EMLR 2
Henworth v United Kingdom Times, 22 November 2004; 505/02
2 Nov 2004
ECHR
Human Rights, Criminal Practice
The claimant had been tried for murder, but had undergone two retrials. On the second he said there was a rule of law that a defendant should not be tried a third time after two juries had failed to agree a conviction. He refused to take any part and was convicted. Held: Whatever part the defendant played in slowing down proceedings, the authorities had a responsibility themselves to expedite a trial. The reasonableness of the length of proceedings was to be viewed in the context of each case. In this case there had been a substantial an unexplained delay in hearing the appeal, and a shorter delay before the third trial. While there were no unusually long periods of inactivity, the circumstances of a third trial demanded a particular need for speed. The applicant's human rights had been infringed.
1 Cites
1 Citers
Regina v Adaway Times, 22 November 2004
3 Nov 2004
CACD
Criminal Practice
The defendant appealed his conviction under the Act. He had contracted to build a conservatory, but certain items were omitted. When this was pointed out, he offered to remedy the defect, but the Trdaing Standards office decided to prosecute. Held: The authority had not followed its own policies. No fraud was shown, and nor was there any deliberate or persistent breach of any legal duty. The conviction was quashed as oppressive.
Trades Description Act 1968 1(1)(b)
In re O'Donoghue [2004] EWCA Civ 1800
4 Nov 2004
CA
Criminal Practice
Appeal against refusal of certificate of inadequacy. Held: On an application by the defendant under section 17, the High Court should survey the present value of all the defendant's property, whether acquired before or after the making of the confiscation order.
Criminal Justice Act 1988 83(1)
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Sejdovic v Italy 56581/00; [2004] ECHR 620; (2004) 42 EHRR 360
10 Nov 2004
ECHR
Human Rights, Criminal Practice
The claimant had been tried and convicted of manslaughter in his absence. The respondent said that he had waived his right to appear at trial by becoming untraceable. Held: The claim succeeded: "The Court re-iterates that neither the letter nor the spirit of article 6 of the Convention prevents a person from waiving of his own free will, either expressly or tacitly, the entitlement to the guarantees of a fair trial; however, any such waiver must be made in an unequivocal manner and must not run counter to any important public interest."
To inform someone of a prosecution brought against him was a legal act of such importance that it must be carried out in accordance with procedural and substantive requirements capable of guaranteeing the exercise of the accused's rights. Even supposing that the applicant was indirectly aware that criminal proceedings had been opened against him, it could not be inferred that he had unequivocally waived his right to appear at his trial. As for the question of safeguards: "It remains to be determined whether the domestic legislation afforded him with sufficient certainty the opportunity of appearing at a new trial."
That safeguard was absent, as the remedy that the criminal procedure code provided did not guarantee with sufficient certainty that the applicant would have the opportunity of appearing at a new trial to present his defence.
1 Citers
[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
Regina (Kent Pharmaceuticals Ltd) v Serious Fraud Office [2004] EWCA Civ 1494; Times, 18 November 2004; [2005] 1 WLR 1302; [2005] 1 All ER 449
11 Nov 2004
CA
Lord Justice Kennedy Lord Justice Chadwick Lord Justice Dyson
Criminal Practice, Human Rights
In 2002 the SFO was investigating allegations that drug companies were selling generic drugs, including penicillin-based antibiotics and warfarin, to the National Health Service at artificially sustained prices. To further the investigation the SFO obtained search warrants and executed them. The company challenged the release of the documents recovered to other government departments. They had only been told after the event. Held: A release should normally only take place after giving notice.
Criminal Justice Act 1987 2(4)
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Hallinan, Blackburn-Gittings and Nott (A Firm), Regina (on the Application Of) v Crown Court at Middlesex Guildhall and Another [2004] EWHC 2726 (Admin); Times, 29 November 2004; [2005] 1 WLR 766
15 Nov 2004
Admn
Rose LJ, Leveson J
Criminal Practice, Legal Professions
In a criminal investigation, the police came to suspect that a junior clerk in a barristers' chambers was intending to give a false alibi. Though the solicitors were innocent of any wrongdoing, the police required their file. The solicitors claimed legal professional privilege. Held: Where there is evidence of specific agreement to pervert the course of justice, which is freestanding and independent, in the sense that it does not require any judgment to be reached in relation to the issues to be tried in the case in the solicitor's office, the court may well be in a position to evaluate whether what has occurred falls within or outwith the protection of legal professional privilege as explained in Cox and Railton.
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 9(1)
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Regina (Westlake) v Criminal Cases Review Commission Times, 19 November 2004; [2004] EWHC 2779 (Admin)
17 Nov 2004
QBD
Criminal Practice
Complaint was made that the Commission had failed to refer to the court of appeal the case for Timothy Evans. Held: The conviction of Timothy Evans for the murder of his daughter was incorrect. Similarly he had not killed his wife. These events had long been recognised as a miscarriage of justice, and an ex gratia payment made to his family. He had however been pardoned for the offence rather than found not guilty. Nevertheless the Commission had found the correct balance and a reference back to the court was inappropriate.
[ Bailii ]
Regina (Gladstone plc) v Manchester City Magistrates Court Times, 26 November 2004; [2004] EWHC 2806 (Admin); [2005] 1 WLR 1987; [2005] 2 All ER 56
18 Nov 2004
QBD
Rose, Leveson JJ
Criminal Practice, Company
It was alleged that at the company's annual genneral meeting the proposed defendant had assaulted the company's chairman. The company prosecuted him. The magistrate dismissed the charge saying that the company had no standing to conduct such a prosecution, there being no public benefit in the company undertaking the prosecution. Held: The company had a proper interest in the orderly conduct of its meetings, and could undertake the prosecution. Such actions must be exceptional, and the court would not want them to be used to stifle opposition to the management of the company.
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Regina v Speechley Times, 01 December 2004; [2004] EWCA Crim 3067
18 Nov 2004
CACD
Kennedy LJ, Bell J, Hughes J
Criminal Practice
The defendant had been accused of misbehaviour as leader of the county council. His counsel wanted to remind the jury of their right to return a not guilty verdict at any time. The judge declined to allow him. Held: The judge was correct. A jury does have the right to acquit a defendant at the end of the prosecution case, but in no case had anyone other than the judge reminded them of this right. The duty of maintenance of fairness lay on the trial judge, and this issue was one for him.
1 Citers
Merseyside Police v Reynolds [2004] EWHC 2862 (Admin)
19 Nov 2004
Admn
Criminal Practice, Police
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 294
[ Bailii ]
Regina v Stocker Unreported, 23 November 2004
23 Nov 2004
CCC
Gordon J
Criminal Practice
(Central Criminal Court) The court was due to try a case alleging that the defendant had killed her child. In care proceedings Hedley J had concluded that a mother had killed her child, but he was positively satisfied that she lacked the intention requisite to establish murder. Nevertheless the Crown alleged and intended to prosecute her for murder. Held: Although the allegations of manslaughter could proceed, the allegation of murder should not. It would amount to an abuse of process for the "issue of the defendant's state of mind" to be litigated again. It would not be "in the public interest in view of the nature and strength of the ruling of Mr Justice Hedley".
1 Cites
1 Citers
Regina v Marcus Times, 03 December 2004
23 Nov 2004
CACD
Laws LJ, Davis J, Griffiths-Williams QC J
Criminal Practice
The defendant appealed his conviction saying that the video identification procedures used had been unfair. He was alleged to have carried out robberies at knife point of people who had just visited cash machines. The defendant had been given the opportunity to select other faces from a database 19,000 images, but only one had the particular characteristics identified to the police by the witness, namely facial hair and greying temples. The police used procedures involving both masked and unmasked comparisons for witnesses. Held: Even the police had admitted that the actual procedure followed had been grossly unfair. The procedure had been a deliberate attempt to evade the protection of a defendant by the 1984 Act. The associated convictions were quashed.
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984
Saik v Regina [2004] EWCA Crim 2936; Times, 29 November 2004
24 Nov 2004
CACD
Criminal Practice, Crime
The defendant appealed his conviction for conspiracy to launder the proeeds of crime. He had tendered the plea on the basis that he had only suspected and not known that the funds were the proceeds of crime. Whether to allow a defendant to withdraw a plea: "For an appeal against conviction to succeed on the basis that the plea was tendered following erroneous advice it seems to us that the facts must be so strong as to show that the plea of guilty was not a true acknowledgment of guilt. The advice must go to the heart of the plea, so that as in the cases of Inns and Turner the plea would not be a free plea and what followed would be a nullity."
Criminal Law Act 1977
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
In the Matter of Christopher Adams, In the Matter of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 [2004] EWHC 2739 (Admin); Times, 06 December 2004
26 Nov 2004
Admn
The Hon Mr Justice Lightman
Criminal Practice
The defendant appealed a refusal of a certificate of inadequacy to an amount due under a confiscation order, saying that the court had wrongly allowed for the value of a consultancy agreement under which he was entitled to receive an annual fee for his services. Held: The value of the contract was not realisable property within the section. It was a chose in action, but it was of the essence of the contract that the consideration was in respect of services which could only be provided in person by the defendant. The appeal succeeded.
Criminal Justice Act 1988 83(1)
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Capewell v Commissioners for HM Customs and Excise and Sinclair [2004] EWCA Civ 1628; [2005] 1 All ER 900; [2004] All ER (D) 29
2 Dec 2004
CA
Lord Justice Laws Lord Justice Longmore Lord Justice Carnwath
Customs and Excise, Criminal Practice
The court approved guidelines for the appointment and remuneration of a receiver appointed under the 1988 Act.
Criminal Justice Act 1988 77(8)
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Holme v Liverpool City Justices and Another [2004] EWHC 3131 (Admin)
6 Dec 2004
Admn
Collins J, Newman J
Criminal Practice
The defendant had been convicted of dangerous driving. The victim's mother complained of the leniency of the sentence, and the magistrates purported to re-open the sentencing under section 142, saying they had been unaware of the very seious nature of the injuries caused. Held: The extent to which a victim's views could be allowed for in sentencing remains unclear. The magiatrates had the means available of obtaining such evidence as they wished of the injuries, and there was no error to allow a re-opening the sentence under the section. If the power was to be exercised, it was necessary that it be done expeditiously. The principle of finality in sentencing should also operate. The order setting aside the decision was quashed.
Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 14
1 Cites
[ Bailii ]
Attorney General's reference (No 89 of 2004) Times, 10 January 2005
7 Dec 2004
CACD
Kennedy LJ, Bell, Hughes JJ
Criminal Practice
Where a time estimate came to be seen by the advocates as inadequate, they had a duty to inform the court.
Assets Recovery Agency, Regina (on the Application Of) v He and Another [2004] EWHC 3021 (Admin)
7 Dec 2004
Admn
Collins J
Criminal Practice
Application was made for an interim receiving order pending resolution of criminal proceedings. Collins J said: "the approach of the Director must be to let criminal proceedings take precedence, as it were, and only act if such proceedings are either not being taken or for any reason may have failed, if notwithstanding their failure or the inability for whatever reason to take them, she takes the view that she can establish within the requirements of the Act that the property in question was unlawfully obtained."
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002
1 Citers
[ Bailii ]
Regina v Hare, Regina v Sullivan Times, 16 December 2004
9 Dec 2004
CACD
Judge LJ, Dobbs J, Sir Michael Wright
Criminal Practice
The defendants appealed their convictions, saying that counsel had been inhibited by the judge from presenting their cases properly. Held: The judge had shown a distinct lack of courtesy to the counsel representing one defendant, without any fault on counsel's part. Counsel had been prevented from putting relevant evidence before the jury, and the judge's behaviour damaged the client's confidence in the trial process. The convictions were quashed but a retrial was ordered.
1 Cites
1 Citers
Reynolds v Ipswich Crown Court [2004] EWHC 3271 (Admin)
9 Dec 2004
Admn
Criminal Practice, Magistrates
Protection from Harassment Act 1997
[ Bailii ]
