In an appeal, the Crown sought leave to apply ex parte to have make certain information subject of a public interest immunity certificate. The defence argued that that was possible only on a first instance hearing.
Held: The procedures were available, and would not infringe the defendant’s human rights. There was nothing in the Court of Human rights jurisprudence to say that admission of such new evidence at the Court of Appeal would infringe the defendant’s right to a fair trial. The defence has no absolute right to disclosure of relevant evidence and that strictly necessary measures restricting the rights of the defence were permissible, provided they were counterbalanced by procedures followed by judicial authority.
Judges:
Lord Justice Rose, Mr Justice Hooper and Mr Justice Goldring
Citations:
Times 08-Nov-2001, Gazette 29-Nov-2001, [2001] EWCA Crim 2226, [2002] 1 WLR 531
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Atlan v The United Kingdom ECHR 19-Jun-2001
It was an infringement of the defendant’s right to a fair trial for the trial judge not to be involved in ex parte applications to exclude evidence. The defect could not be remedied by the same evidence later being presented also to the appeal court . .
Cited – Jasper v The United Kingdom ECHR 16-Feb-2000
Grand Chamber – The defendants had been convicted after the prosecution had withheld evidence from them and from the judge under public interest immunity certificates. They complained that they had not had fair trials.
Held: The right was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Practice, Criminal Evidence, Human Rights, Crime
Updated: 27 October 2022; Ref: scu.167040
