The defendant had been held in custody awaiting committal on a murder charge. An additional charge of manslaughter was added. The defendant argued that this did not constitute a new offence so as to allow an extension of custody time limits.
Held: The issue was the actual information laid before the magistrates and whether the second one constituted a different offence. If it did, the custody time limits restarted in the absence of some abuse. The regulations did not infringe the defendant’s human right to liberty.
Lord Hope said that before having recourse to section 3 one must first be satisfied that the ordinary construction of the provision gives rise to an incompatibility.
Lord Slynn of Hadley Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead Lord Hope of Craighead Lord Clyde Lord Scott of Foscote
Gazette 24-May-2001, Times 13-Mar-2001,  UKHL 12,  2 All ER 1,  2 Cr App Rep 20,  2 WLR 865, (2001) 165 JPN 327,  ACD 82, (2001) 165 JP 465,  HRLR 29
England and Wales
Cited – ANS and Another v ML SC 11-Jul-2012
The mother opposed adoption proceedings, and argued that the provision in the 2007 Act, allowing a court to dispense with her consent, infringed her rights under Article 8 and was therefore made outwith the powers of the Scottish Parliament.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Practice, Magistrates, Human Rights
Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.86017