Regina v Rowbotham and others: 1988

Ontario Court of Appeal – ‘In our view a trial judge confronted with an exceptional case where legal aid has been refused and who is of the opinion that representation of the accused by counsel is essential to a fair trial may, upon being satisfied that the accused lacks the means to employ counsel, stay the proceedings against the accused until the necessary funding of counsel is provided.’ Although they base that upon the charter of the state, they were of the view that the trial judge had the power to do that even before the advent of the charter; in other words, under the Common Law.’

Judges of Appeal Martin, Corey and Grange
(1988) 41 CCC,(3d) 1
Cited by:
CitedRegina v Dadshani 8-Feb-2008
Ontario – Superior Court of Justice – proceeding in the nature of a Rowbotham or Fisher application to secure state funding for the defences of the accused who are facing charges of first degree murder. . .
CitedP, Regina v Misc 18-Mar-2008
Crown Court at Harrow – The Court stayed the criminal proceedings because the defendant was unable to retain counsel because of what was said to be a failure to provide adequate legal aid fees in criminal confiscation proceedings. . .
CitedIn re Brownlee for Judicial Review SC 29-Jan-2014
The appellant challenged the course taken in his criminal trial after his legal team had withdrawn citing professional embarassment. No replacement team could be found willing to act in a complicated sentencing matter because of the reduced fixed . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Legal Aid, Criminal Practice

Updated: 21 November 2021; Ref: scu.541393