Regina v H (On appeal from the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)): HL 30 Jan 2003

The defendant had been found unfit to stand trial, at a later hearing under the section, the jury had found that he had committed the act complained of. He was discharged but ordered to be placed on the sex offenders register. He appealed on the basis that the later finding was incompatible with the Convention.
Held: A difficult balance had to be found between the rights of a defendant unable to defend himself, and the need to control someone who might pose a risk to the public. The court must first under s4A, see how the issue is classified in British law. Here a crime was alleged. However the function of a hearing under section 4A was to protect the defendant, not to decide whether he had committed an offence, and no conviction or penalty would follow. The section was compatible.
Bingham of Cornhill, Nicholls of Birkenhead, Hutton, Hobhouse of Woodborough, Walker of Gestingthorpe LL
Times 31-Jan-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
House of Lords, Bailii
Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 4A, European Convention on Human Rights 6
CitedEngel And Others v The Netherlands (1) ECHR 8-Jun-1976
The court was asked whether proceedings in a military court against soldiers for disciplinary offences involved criminal charges within the meaning of Article 6(1): ‘In this connection, it is first necessary to know whether the provision(s) defining . .
CitedRegina v Antoine HL 30-Mar-2000
The appellant sought to argue that despite having been found unfit to plead under the 1964 Act, it was still open to him to argue that the defence under section 2 of the 1957 Act applied, and that he was entitled to be plead diminished . .

Cited by:
CitedA, Regina (on the Application of) v Harrow Crown Court and others Admn 14-Aug-2003
The applicant sought his release from detention in hospital, correction of records at the Crown Court, and confirmation that his detention had infringed his human rights. He had been accused of two assaults, but was found unfit to plead under . .
CitedRegina on the Application of South West Yorkshire Mental Health NHS Trust v Crown Court at Bradford CA 19-Dec-2003
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. . .
CitedW v Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council CA 6-May-2004
The claimant had been detained by the respondent under the Act. A trubunal had ordered his release subject to proper arrangements for his support in the community. In the absence of such arrangements being made, he complained at his continued . .
CitedRegina v Chal CACD 5-Oct-2007
The defendant appealed the decision of the court in a hearing under the 1964 Act that he had been involved in the offence at issue. He said the court had been wrong to admit hearsay evidence.
Held: The prosecution had had to present evidence . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 January 2021; Ref: scu.178821