A Crown Court decision to stay an indictment for lack of jurisdiction, was not susceptible to Judicial Review. This was a ‘decision affecting conduct of trial’. The House considered the meaning of the phrase ‘other than its jurisdiction in matters relating to trial on indictment’ in the Act, deciding that the words relate only to orders directed to and affecting the exercise of its jurisdiction by the Crown Court. There is nothing to suggest that the words are intended to limit in any way the power of the High Court to make orders against any party other than the Crown Court. Judicial review would not lie to a superior court of record in the absence of express provision.
Lord Browne-Wilkinson
Times 07-May-1993, Times 26-Nov-1993, Gazette 23-Jun-1993, Independent 07-Dec-1993, Independent 07-May-1993, [1993] 1 WLR 1524, [1993] 4 All ER 928, (1994) 98 Cr App R 461, [1994] 1 AC 9, (1993) 97 Cr App R 203
Supreme Court Act 1981 29(3)
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Regina v Manchester Crown Court ex parte Director of Public Prosecutions QBD 20-Jan-1993
MEP’s are susceptible to prosecution. The National courts do have jurisdiction. . .
Dicta approved – In re Smalley HL 1985
Challenge by a surety to an estreatment of his recognizance was not a matter relating to a trial on indictment for the purpose of section 29(3) because it did not affect the conduct of the trial. A sensible legislative purpose can be seen for . .
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Department of Education and Employment ex parte Begbie CA 20-Aug-1999
A statement made by a politician as to his intentions on a particular matter if elected could not create a legitimate expectation as regards the delivery of the promise after elected, even where the promise would directly affect individuals, and the . .
Cited – G v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Interim Decision) CA 9-Mar-2004
A certificate had been granted by the Home Secretary that the applicant was suspected of terrorism, and he had accordingly been detained under special procedures. When his case had come before the Special Immigration Appeal Tribunal, they had . .
Cited – Regina v Director of Public Prosecutions, ex parte Kebilene and others HL 28-Oct-1999
(Orse Kebeline) The DPP’s appeal succeeded. A decision by the DPP to authorise a prosecution could not be judicially reviewed unless dishonesty, bad faith, or some other exceptional circumstance could be shown. A suggestion that the offence for . .
Cited – Belhaj and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another SC 4-Jul-2018
Challenge to decision not to prosecute senior Intelligence Service officials for alleged offences in connection with his unlawful rendition and mistreatment in Libya. The issue here was whether on the hearing of the application for judicial review, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 July 2021; Ref: scu.87253
