The court was asked whether what a defendant’s counsel had said in a plea in mitigation in one case could be proved and admitted as evidence in another trial. The objection was made that the evidence could not go before the jury until the prosecution proved that what counsel had said in mitigation was on the defendant’s instructions. The trial judge admitted the evidence as an admission made by an agent within the apparent scope of his authority. The barrister was then called who said on oath that he had said what he had said without instructions.
Held: The contested evidence was admissible as the circumstances in which the barrister said what he said amounted to prima facie evidence that he was authorised by the defendant to say it. Lawton LJ set out three principles in relation to admissions made by agents in the context of criminal proceedings. An authorised agent can make an admission on behalf of his principal; a party seeking to rely on an admission must prove that the agent was so authorised; and ‘Whenever a fact has to be proved, any evidence having probative effect and not excluded by rule is admissible to prove that fact. Whenever a barrister comes into court in robes and in the presence of his client tells the judge that he appears for that client, the court is entitled to assume and always does assume that he has his client’s authority to conduct the case and to say on the client’s behalf whatever in his professional discretion he thinks is in his client’s interests to say. If the court could not make this assumption, the administration of justice would become very difficult indeed. The very circumstances provide evidence first that the barrister has his client’s authority to speak for him and secondly that what the barrister says is what his client wants him to say.’
Judges:
Lawton LJ
Citations:
(1975) 61 Cr App R 67
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Newell, Regina v CACD 30-Mar-2012
The appellant challenged the introduction in evidence of a previous inconsistent statement lodged on his behalf by counsel on a Plea and Case Management Form at a directions hearing.
Held: The appeal was allowed. An advocate plainly has . .
Applied – Firth v Epping Magistrates Court Admn 3-Feb-2011
The defendant had faced a charge of assault in the Magistrates Court and had pleaded not guilty. She had indicated in the ‘trial issues’ form through her lawyer that her defence was self defence. The prosecutor then indicated that the charge was to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Evidence
Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.452399
