Regina v Director of Public Prosecutions, ex parte Lee: Admn 18 Mar 1999

Application for judicial review of CPS decision on disclosure of evidence before committal.
Held: The court recognised an ongoing duty of disclosure from the time of arrest. At the stage before committal, there are continuing obligations on the prosecutor to make such disclosure as justice and fairness may require in the particular circumstances of the case, that is, where it could reasonably be expected to assist the defence when applying for bail. This will ensure that the defendant enjoys ‘equality of arms’ with the prosecution.
Kennedy LJ said of the 1996 Act: ‘The 1996 Act does not specifically address the period between arrest and committal, and whereas in most cases prosecution disclosure can wait until after committal without jeopardising the defendant’s right to a fair trial the prosecutor must always be alive to the need to make advance disclosure of material of which he is aware (either from his own consideration of the papers or because his attention has been drawn to it by the defence) and which he, as a responsible prosecutor, recognises should be disclosed at an earlier stage. Examples canvassed before us were- (a) previous convictions of a complainant or deceased if that information could reasonably be expected to assist the defence when applying for bail; (b) material which might enable a defendant to make a pre-committal application to stay the proceedings as an abuse of process;’


Kennedy LJ, Blofield J


[1999] 1 WLR 1950, [1999] EWHC Admin 242, [1999] Cr App R 304, [1999] 2 All ER 737




Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Nolan CACD 15-Feb-2002
The defendant was accused of murder. He had been identified by a witness who knew him, but the witness himself was murdered before the trial. The court allowed the prosecutor to read the deceased witness’ statement. Another witness for whom an ID . .
CitedRaissi, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 14-Feb-2008
The claimant appealed against refusal of his request for judicial review of the defendant’s decision not to award him damages after his wrongful arrest and detention after he was wrongly suspected of involvement in terrorism. He had been discharged . .
CitedDirector of Public Prosecutions v Ara Admn 21-Jun-2001
The Director challenged the decision of the magistrates to stay a prosecution of the defendant as an abuse of process. The defendant had been interviewed without a solicitor. He went away to seek legal advice. The solicitor requested a copy of the . .
CitedNunn, Regina (on The Application of) v Chief Constable of Suffolk Constabulary and Another SC 18-Jun-2014
Limits to Duty To Investigate
The claimant had been convicted of a murder. He continued to protest his innocence, and now sought judicial review of the respondent’s decision not to act upon his requests for further investigations which might prove his innocence.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.139506