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.’
Judges:
The Vice President of Court of Appeal, Criminal Division
Lord Justice Rose
Mr Justice Cresswell
Mr Justice Andrew Smith
Citations:
[2004] EWCA Crim 1368, [2004] 1 WLR 2932
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – H, Regina v Re Interlocutory Application CACD 7-Jul-2006
The defendant sought leave to appeal against a refusal of a crown court judge at a preparatory hearing to order disclosure.
Held: Because orders for disclosure would not form part of the material to be considered in a preparatory hearing as . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Practice
Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.263568