Regina v Radley: CACD 1973

On a single count indictment alleging conspiracy to defraud, after the Prosecution opening it amended by addition counts to cater for the possibility that more than one conspiracy had existed; This made the case easier for the Jury and no injustice resulted from the amendment at the stage at which it occurred. An indictment may be defective if it fails to include a count that is ‘possible on the depositions.
Widgery LCJ said: ‘We can see no possible reason for saying that to arraign the accused again after the amendment is made can be prejudicial or irregular in any way. By arraignment, we refer of course strictly to the putting of the charge to the accused and asking him to plead to it. It is not suggested that when that has been done he has to be put in charge of the jury a second time or that a jury have to be empanelled again. It is perfectly permissible, if an amendment is made of a substantial character after the trial has begun and after arraignment, for the arraignment to be repeated, and we think that it is a highly desirable practice that this should be done wherever amendments of any real significant are made. It may be that in cases like Harden . . where amendments are very slight and cannot really be regarded as in any way introducing a new element into the trial a second arraignment is not required, but judges in doubt on this point will be well advised to direct a second arraignment.’
Widgery LCJ
(1973) 58 Cr App R 394, [1974] Crim LR 312
England and Wales
Citing:
ApprovedRegina v Johal and Ram 1972
Ashworth J said: ‘The argument for the appellants appeared to involve the proposition that an indictment, in order to be defective, must be one which in law did not charge any offence at all and therefore is bad on the face of it. We do not take . .

Cited by:
CitedSerious Fraud Office v Papachristos and Another CACD 19-Sep-2014
The applicants challenged their convictions and sentences for conspiracy to corrupt. They owned a company manufacturing fuel additives. Technology developments meant that they came under increasing pressure on sales. They were said to have entered . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 24 July 2021; Ref: scu.536998