The claimant had been imprisoned then released after his conviction for sexual assaults. He appealed against rejection of his claim for compensation. The criterion for compensation was demonstrating that something had ‘gone seriously wrong in the conduct of the trial.’
Held: The claim failed. ‘a true analysis of the law is in any event less favourable to Mr Siddall; it is not suggested that he could establish beyond reasonable doubt that he was clearly innocent thereby bringing himself within the approach advocated by Lord Steyn.’ The claimant’s case and that of the other accused discharged ta the same time were not eth same and no argument from unequality in treatment would succeed.
Judges:
Leveson LJ, Sweeney J
Citations:
[2009] EWHC 482 (Admin)
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Harris, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 10-Dec-2007
The court considered an application for compensation by a former prisoner whose conviction had been overturned. . .
triticised – In re Boyle, Judicial Review QBNI 24-Oct-2007
The court considered an appeal by the claimant against refusal of compensation where he had served a term of imprisonment, but later had his conviction overturned. The conviction had relied upon challenged admissions which two police officers . .
Cited – Clibery, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 30-Jul-2007
The claimant sought judicial review of a decision of the Home Secretary, to refuse his application for compensation. He had first been convicted and imprisoned and then had his conviction quashed. The respondent did not think that the conviction was . .
See Also – Siddall and Brooke, Regina v CACD 15-Jun-2006
The court considered cases referred to it by the Criminal Cases Review Commission. Each related to convictions for sexual assaults on children in care. New material including several untrue allegations by the complainants suggested that the . .
Cited – Regina v Pendleton HL 13-Dec-2001
The defendant had appealed his conviction for murder to the Court of Appeal. The 1968 Act required the court to consider whether the conviction was unsafe. New evidence was before the Court of Appeal, but they had rejected the appeal.
Held: . .
Cited – Allen (formerly Harris), Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice CA 15-Jul-2008
The claimant appealed against refusal of a review of the defendant to allow her compensation after her conviction for manslaughter of her infant son was quashed.
Held: The conviction had been based on flawed expert evidence.
Article 6(2) . .
Cited – Mullen, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 29-Apr-2004
The claimant had been imprisoned, but his conviction was later overturned. He had been a victim of a gross abuse of executive power. The British authorities had acted in breach of international law and had been guilty of ‘a blatant and extremely . .
Cited – O’Brien and others v Independent Assessor HL 14-Mar-2007
The claimants had been wrongly imprisoned for a murder they did not commit. The assessor had deducted from their compensation a sum to represent the living costs they would have incurred if living freely. They also appealed differences from a . .
Cited by:
Cited – Adams, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice SC 11-May-2011
The three claimants had each been convicted of murders and served time. Their convictions had been reversed eventually, and they now appealed against the refusal of compensation for imprisonment, saying that there had been a miscarriage of justice. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Damages, Criminal Practice
Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.323741