Regina v Moore, Kerr, Haroon: CACD 5 Oct 2001

The applicants challenged the procedures under which, having been found unfit to plead by proceedings under the section, they were then found to have committed the acts forming the offences. The defendants were unable to put forward any case in rebuttal. Applications to stay proceedings as an abuse of process had failed. Were such proceedings criminal proceedings. Not all proceedings which might result in a deprivation of liberty were criminal proceedings. Proceedings under sections 4 and 4A also did not constitute criminal proceedings. The complaint that the inability to defend themselves made a trial unfair confused the rights under the convention with the ability to exercise those rights. The latter could not be guaranteed by any convention. What is a fair hearing varies with the situation.


Rose LJ, Bell J, Stanley Burnton J


Gazette 25-Oct-2001, Times 01-Nov-2001


Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 4(1), European Convention on Human Rights, Criminal Procedure (Insanity and Unfitness to Plead) Act 1991


England and Wales


CitedRegina (McCann and Others) v Manchester Crown Court CA 9-Mar-2001
Proceedings applying for an anti-social behaviour order, were properly civil proceedings, with civil standards of evidence, and the Human Rights Act provisions relating to criminal proceedings, were not applicable either. The section included acts . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Human Rights, Health

Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.166550