CA v Public Prosecution Service (No 2): QBNI 2 Apr 2014

The applicant is the subject of an allegation of having inflicted grievous bodily harm contrary to section 20 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861 (‘OAPA’). The allegations relate to an incident that occurred in 2012 when she was 16. During the course of 2013 she challenged a Public Prosecution Service (‘PPS’) conclusion that the allegation was not suitable for diversionary disposal, as an alternative to prosecution, as provided for by the Criminal Justice (Children) (Northern Ireland) Order 1998

Morgan LCJ and Coghlin LJ
[2014] NIQB 44
Bailii

Northern Ireland, Criminal Practice

Updated: 04 December 2021; Ref: scu.526645

ex parte HTV Cymru (Wales) Ltd: 2002

The court granted an injunction to restrain the media from interviewing witnesses during the course of a criminal trial, and until all the evidence was complete. One witness would have to be recalled, and others might be recalled, and accordingly held that the proposed interviews would constitute a contempt of court pursuant to ss.1 and 2 of the 1981 Act.
Aikens J said: ‘Of course the power of the Crown Court to grant injunctions is strictly limited to the specific matters that are set out in section 45(4). There is no general power in the Crown Court to grant injunctions. But I am satisfied that the Crown Court has the power to grant an injunction to restrain a threatened contempt of court in relation to a matter that is before the Crown Court in question.’

Aikens J
[2002] EMLR 11, [2002] EMLR 184
Supreme Court Act 198145(4), Contempt of Court Act 1981 1 2
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedFlood v Times Newspapers Ltd QBD 2-Oct-2009
The defendant had published a story in its newspaper. At that time it attracted Reynolds qualified privilege. After the circumstances changed, the paper offered an updating item. That offer was rejected as inadequate.
Held: The qualified . .
CitedRegina v Croydon Crown Court ex parte Trinity Mirror Plc; In re Trinity Mirror plc CACD 1-Feb-2008
An order had been made protecting the identity of a defendant who pleaded guilty to possessing indecent images of children. The order was made in the interests of his own children, although they had been neither witnesses in the proceedings against . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Criminal Practice

Updated: 04 December 2021; Ref: scu.377203

Chuah, Regina (on The Application of) v Birmingham Crown Court and Another: Admn 30 Jul 2013

Application for judicial review of refusal of leave to appeal against conviction out of time.
Held: Proceedings by way of judicial review were wrong, because the Claimant sought to undermine the basis of the conviction and so any challenge to the Crown Court rulings ought to have been by way of Case Stated.

Saunders, Hickinbottom LJJ
[2013] EWHC 3336 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales

Criminal Practice, Judicial Review

Updated: 29 November 2021; Ref: scu.520864

In 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 fee legal aid scheme. He had succeeded at first instance, but the Court of Appeal had held the Rules to be lawful.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The Rules failed to make allowance for the need for legal representatives to be paid for preparatory work in connection with sentencing had not been allowed for. However, sice the Rules had already been amended, the remedy would be by way of a declaration, rather than mandamus.
The Court of appeal had not allowed for the fact that the change of representation was initiated by the legal representatives and not by the appellant.

Lord Neuberger, President, Lord Kerr, Lord Clarke, Lord Reed, Lord Hodge
[2014] UKSC 4, UKSC 2013/0247, [2014] NI 188
Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC Summary, SC
Legal Aid, Advice and Assistance (Northern Ireland) Order 1981
Northern Ireland
Citing:
Appeal fromBrownlee, Re Judicial Review CANI 23-Oct-2013
The applicant had successfully challenged the Legal Aid rules as they applied to his seeking representation on a sentencing issue in the Crown Court which had led to him being unable to find legal representation because of the inadequacy of the fee . .
At First InstanceBrownlee, Re Judicial Review QBNI 20-Mar-2013
The applicant, a convicted prisoner sought a declaration that the respondent’s decision to make no provision for exceptional circumstances in the payment of fees under the 2011 Amendment Rules is unlawful and a declaration that the said Rules . .
CitedRegina 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 . .
CitedMcLean and Another v Buchanan, Procurator Fiscal and Another PC 24-May-2001
(Appeal from High Court of Justiciary (Scotland)) It was not an infringement of a defendant’s right to a fair trial where the costs of defending the case brought against him would be substantial, but where his solicitors would be paid only a small . .
CitedCullen v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary (Northern Ireland) HL 10-Jul-2003
The claimant had been arrested. He had been refused access to a solicitor whilst detaiined, but, in breach of statutory duty, he had not been given reasons as to why access was denied. He sought damages for that failure.
Held: If damages were . .
CitedRegina v Ulcay CACD 19-Oct-2007
The defendant appealed against his conviction, saying that his counsel and solicitors had withdrawn at the last moment on the grounds of professional embarrassment, the defendant having altered his instructions. New lawyers were unwilling to assist . .
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. . .
CitedPennock and Another v Hodgson CA 27-Jul-2010
In a boundary dispute, the judge had found a boundary, locating it by reference to physical features not mentioned in the unambigous conveyance.
Held: The judge had reiterated but not relied upon the statement as to the subjective views of the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Legal Aid

Updated: 21 November 2021; Ref: scu.521153

Rahmdezfouli, Regina (on The Application of) v Crown Court Sitting At Wood Green and Another: Admn 9 Oct 2013

The appellant challenged the refusal to allow him to vacate a guilty plea to a charge of failures to comply with a planning enforcement notice. It had been agreed that the magistrates had failed to ask the two questions required under the 1980 Act. The claimant contended that the Crown Court Judge erred in refusing to allow him to vacate his plea after finding as a fact that the magistrates’ court clerk had ‘failed to ask the statutory questions of the applicant’ as required by s.17A of the MCA. It was not disputed that the requisite procedure had not been followed ‘in any respect’, and ‘defence counsel conferred with his client and on coming into court told the court that his client wished to plead guilty to the offence. It was argued by the Interested Party . . that it was therefore appropriate for the court to accept from what counsel said that this defendant was fully aware of the implications of the offence to which he was intending to plead guilty and should therefore be regarded as having been fully informed before making that decision.’
The claimant, submitted: ‘that there was a requirement that the defendant should at the least have explained to him by the court, in ordinary language as the section requires, of four essential things: that the offence he faced was an either way offence; that he would be asked for an indication as to his plea if the case proceeded to trial; that if he indicated he wished to plead guilty that would be treated as a guilty plea; and fourthly that the court had the power to send him to the Crown Court for sentence if it thought right so to do.’Mackay J replied: ‘The issue therefore in this claim is whether it was the intention of Parliament that a failure to follow the statutory procedure laid down in section 17A rendered all subsequent proceedings invalid and a nullity, or whether they were to be considered a procedural failure.’ The claimant submiitted that the failure in that case ‘went to the heart of the court’s jurisdiction’. A magistrates’ court only derived its jurisdiction from statute and was only entitled to try an either way offence, as opposed to a summary offence, where the statutory requirement has been fully complied with. Mackay J observed that there was ‘a clear line of authority’ supporting that submission. He referred, inter alia, to Cockshott and Ex p Machin. He noted that theauthorities were not disapproved in Ashton. Quashing the conviction, Mackay J reasoned: ‘Adopting the criterion expressed in paragraph 4 of Ashton and not disapproved by the House of Lords in [Clarke] the legislature in enacting section 17A must have intended . . acting in line with then existing authority, that where a magistrates’ court declined or failed to follow the requirements of the section it was acting without jurisdiction every bit as much as if, for instance, it had purported to try a defendant on a charge of homicide . . ..’

Moses LJ, MacKay J
[2013] EWHC 2998 (Admin), [2013] WLR(D) 377, (2013) 177 JP 677, [2014] 1 All ER 567, [2014] Crim LR 158, 177 JP 677, [2014] 1 Cr App R 20
Bailii, WLRD
Magistrates Court Act 1980 17A
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRegina v Kent Justices, Ex parte Machin 1952
The applicant had been charged before the justices with indictable offences. He consented to summary trial but it had not been explained to him that he might be committed to the Quarter Sessions for sentence.
Held: The court allowed . .
CitedClarke, Regina v; Regina v McDaid HL 6-Feb-2008
An indictment had not been signed despite a clear statutory provision that it should be. The defects were claimed to have been cured by amendment before sentence.
Held: The convictions failed. Sections 1(1) and 2(1) of the 1933 Act which . .

Cited by:
CitedWestminster City Council v Owadally and Another Admn 17-May-2017
Defendant must plea to charge, and not counsel
The defendants had, through their barrister, entered pleas of guilty, but the crown court had declared the convictions invalid because this had to have been done by the defendants personally, and remitted the cases and the confiscation proceedings . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Magistrates

Updated: 21 November 2021; Ref: scu.516326

Jolleys, Regina v, Ex Parte Press Association: CACD 27 Jun 2013

Leveson LJ said: ‘It was for anyone seeking to derogate from open justice to justify that derogation by clear and cogent evidence: see R v Central Criminal Court ex parte W, B and C [2001] 1 Cr App R 2 and in civil cases, the Practice Guidance (Interim Non-disclosure Orders) [2012] 1 WLR 1033 and Derispaska v Cherney [2012] EWCA Civ 1235 per Lewison LJ (at paragraph 14). The order was made when defence counsel asserted the likelihood of the defendant’s son suffering ‘the most extraordinary stigma through no fault of his own’ which caused the Recorder to ask the reporter what the need for identifying the son was, rather than whether it was necessary to restrict his identification.’

Leveson LJ
[2013] EWCA Crim 1135
Bailii
England and Wales

Criminal Practice, Media

Updated: 21 November 2021; Ref: scu.516262

Regina v Jones (Robert) No 2: 1972

The court was entitled to proceed to hear the case in the absence of the defendant where he had absconded. I was counsel’s prerogative not the judge’s, to decide whether he could continue to represent the defendant.

[1972] 1 WLR 887, [1972] 56 CAR 413
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedDelroy Ricketts v The Queen PC 15-Dec-1997
(Jamaica) Special leave was granted to the defendant to appeal his conviction for murder. Counsel had been late for his trial, and the jury empanelled. When counsel arrived he said the defendant had not understood the judge. A trial took place as to . .
CitedRegina v Ulcay CACD 19-Oct-2007
The defendant appealed against his conviction, saying that his counsel and solicitors had withdrawn at the last moment on the grounds of professional embarrassment, the defendant having altered his instructions. New lawyers were unwilling to assist . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Legal Professions

Updated: 20 November 2021; Ref: scu.242117

Regina v G and B: CACD 2004

Rose LJ said: ‘Both in principle and pragmatically, whether a solicitor or barrister can properly continue to act is a matter for him or her and not the court, although of course the court can properly make observations on the matter’.

Rose LJ
[2004] 2 Cr App R 37, [2004] EWCA 1368
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedH, Regina v (Interlocutory application: Disclosure) HL 28-Feb-2007
The trial judge had refused an order requested at a preparatory hearing by the defence for the disclosure of documents held by the prosecutor. The House was now asked whether a right of appeal existed against such a refusal.
Held: The practice . .
CitedRegina v Ulcay CACD 19-Oct-2007
The defendant appealed against his conviction, saying that his counsel and solicitors had withdrawn at the last moment on the grounds of professional embarrassment, the defendant having altered his instructions. New lawyers were unwilling to assist . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Legal Professions

Updated: 20 November 2021; Ref: scu.252539

Regina v Williams: CACD 28 Jun 2005

The defendant had been convicted of many motoring offences. In sentencing him the judge had added an Anti-Social behaviour Order, which would have the effect of imposing a greater punishment for any further offences than would be possible for the offences themselves.
Held: The order if used for that purpose was improper.

Mance LJ, Elias J, Sir Charles Mantell
Times 15-Jul-2005, [2005] EWCA Crim 1796
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRegina v Hall CACD 2004
The court considered the propriety of making an anti-social behaviour at the same time as sentencing for traffic offences: ‘There is nothing wrong in principle in making such an order when there are driving offences of such a regularity and type and . .
CitedRegina v Kirby CACD 2005
The court asked when it might be able to add an anti-social behaviour order when sentencing: ‘To make an anti-social behaviour order in a case . . . Where the underlying objective was to give the court higher sentencing powers in the event of . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 20 November 2021; Ref: scu.228612

Twomey, Cameron And Guthrie v The United Kingdom (Judgment): ECHR 28 May 2013

Ineta Ziemele, P
67318/09 22226/12 – Admissibility Decision, [2013] ECHR 578
Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights, Criminal Justice Act 2003 46(3)
Human Rights
Citing:
Legal SummaryTwomey, Cameron and Guthrie v The United Kingdom (Legal Summary) ECHR 28-May-2013
ECHR Criminal proceedings
Article 6-1
Fair hearing
Equality of arms
Independent tribunal
Trial by judge sitting alone owing to risk of jury tampering: inadmissible
Facts – The case . .

Cited by:
Principal judgmentTwomey, Cameron and Guthrie v The United Kingdom (Legal Summary) ECHR 28-May-2013
ECHR Criminal proceedings
Article 6-1
Fair hearing
Equality of arms
Independent tribunal
Trial by judge sitting alone owing to risk of jury tampering: inadmissible
Facts – The case . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Criminal Practice

Updated: 14 November 2021; Ref: scu.511077

BW, Regina (on The Application of) v Caernarfon Youth Court and Another: Admn 27 Mar 2013

The defendant youth having been convicted on his plea of several sexual offences, now sought judicial review of the decision to commit him to the Crown Court for sentence.

Pitchford LJ, Wyn Williams J
[2013] EWHC 1466 (Admin)
Bailii
Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 3C

Criminal Practice

Updated: 14 November 2021; Ref: scu.510802

In re Norris, Application by Norris: HL 28 Jun 2001

The applicant’s husband had been made the subject of a drugs confiscation order. Part of this was an order against the house. She had failed in asserting that the house was hers. Her appeal to a civil court had been disallowed as an abuse. It was held that the civil court was looking to different issues. In the Crown Court the onus had been on the husband. She had no right of representation, and her interests were not the same as those of her husband. She was to be allowed to challenge the order made. As the registered proprietor, the burden of proof lay on customs and excise.
Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough referred to earlier cases: ‘These are illustrations of the principle of abuse of process. Any such abuse must involve something which amounts to a misuse of the litigational process. Clear cases of litigating without any honest belief in any basis for doing so or litigating without having any legitimate interest in the litigation are simple cases of abuse. Attempts to relitigate issues which have already been the subject of judicial decision may or may not amount to an abuse of process. Ordinarily such situations fall to be governed by the principle of estoppel per rem judicatam or of issue estoppel (admitted not to be applicable in the present case). It will be a rare case where the litigation of an issue which has not previously been decided between the same parties or their privies will amount to an abuse.’

Hope, Browne-Wilkinson, Clyde, Hutton, Hobhouse LL
Times 29-Jun-2001, Gazette 26-Jul-2001, [2001] 1 WLR 1388, [2001] UKHL 34, [2001] 3 FCR 97, [2001] 3 All ER 961
Bailii, House of Lords
Drug Trafficking Offences Act 1986
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedHunter v Chief Constable of the West Midlands Police HL 19-Nov-1981
No collateral attack on Jury findigs.
An attempt was made to open up in a civil action, allegations of assaults by the police prior to the making of confessions which had been disposed of in a voir dire in the course of a criminal trial. The plaintiffs had imprisoned having spent many . .
CitedUnited States Government v Montgomery and Another HL 6-Feb-2001
An English court had power to make a restraining order against the disposal of assets pending an application for confiscation pursuant to a US order. This applied even if the US original judgment predated the date on which the US was added to the . .
Appeal fromClifford R Norris, Re; In the Matter of an Application By Teresa W Norris CA 27-Jan-2000
After a drugs trial, the commissioners sought a confiscation order against the defendant’s assets. The defendant’s wife argued that the house was in reality hers. The trial judge found against her. In later proceedings enforce the order, the wife . .
CitedAshmore v British Coal Corporation CA 1990
The plaintiff was one of many female employees who complained to the industrial tribunal that she was paid less by the defendant than her male counterparts. Sample cases were selected for trial and the others stayed pending a decision. It was an . .
CitedMcintosh v HM Advocate HCJ 31-Oct-2000
An application for a confiscation order following a drugs trial, was subject to the requirement of a presumption of innocence. The assumptions required of a court under the Act as to the source of assets acquired by the convicted person violated . .
CitedAbbas Kassimali Gokal v Serious Fraud Office CA 16-Mar-2001
The defendant was convicted of an offence to which section 15 of the Theft Act did not apply. It involved a deception of the auditors of BCCI in concealing a number of substantial loans made to a group of companies run by the defendant. Buxton J had . .

Cited by:
CitedMay, Regina v HL 14-May-2008
The defendant had been convicted of involvement in a substantial VAT fraud, and made subject to a confiscation order. He was made subject to a confiscation order in respect of the amounts lost to the fraud where he was involved, but argued that the . .
CitedGibson v Revenue and Customs Prosecution Office CA 12-Jun-2008
The claimant’s husband had been made subject to a criminal confiscation order in the sum of pounds 5.5 million. She now sought to appeal an action against life policies in which she claimed a 50% interest.
Held: Despite the finding that she . .
CitedLamb v Revenue and Customs Prosecutions Office CA 18-Mar-2010
The appellant challenged the appointment of a receiver in respect of property registered in his name, but said to be the realisable property of a man convicted of cheating the revenue. He said that he had funded the property, and that he had not . .
CitedLarkfield Ltd and Others v Revenue and Customs Prosecution Office and Others CA 12-May-2010
The defendant in criminal proceedings (M) had been found to be beneficial owner of property. The company, its registered proprietor appealed against an order declaring the property to be a realisable asset of M. The respondent had said the . .
CitedMichael Wilson and Partners Ltd v Sinclair and Another CA 13-Jan-2017
The appellant company sought to recover assets which, it said, had been acquired by a former partner in breach of his obligations under the partnership agreement, but which had been taken in the names of some of the respondents. There had been an . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Litigation Practice

Updated: 12 November 2021; Ref: scu.82076

Adgyei, Regina v: CACD 11 Aug 2016

Conviction in Excess of Jurisdiction

Appeal against conviction by the unusual route of a certificate of the trial judge. The defendant had been convicted of having a bladed article and of resisting a police constable. He had been convicted by a jury of an offence triable only summarily.
Held: Upon the entry of the not guilty plea, the Crown Court ceased to have jurisdiction, and should have remitted to the Magistrates. The conviction was quashed.

Bean LJ, Foskett, Hickinbottom JJ
[2016] EWCA Crim 1405
Bailii
Crime and Disorder Act 1998
England and Wales

Criminal Practice

Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.570715

Crown Prosecution Service v P; Director of Public Prosecutions v P: Admn 27 Apr 2007

The prosecutor appealed a grant of a stay of a prosecution of the 13 year old defendant as an abuse of process. Reports had indicated that he was unfit to plead. The prosecution contended that, if the court thought P ought not to face trial by reason of his disability, it should proceed to decide whether he had done the acts alleged and, if satisfied that he had, should then consider medical evidence and all the circumstances of the case before deciding whether an order under section 37(2) of the Mental Health Act was appropriate.
Held: Though the prosecutor’s appeal succeeded, the matter should not be remitted because of the delay. The were two separate questions; whether the defendant was able to understand and plead to the charge against him, and whether he would be able to take an effective part in the trial. It was for the court to decide this, not the doctors: ‘the medical evidence should be considered as part of the evidence in the case and not as the sole evidence on a freestanding application.’ That another court may have decided that a defendant was doli incapax did not prevent a later court taking a case forward. It had to decide the matter afresh. The power and duty to consider this was a continuing one throughout the trial. Obiter, section 34 has not abolished the doctrine of doli incapax, the presumption of incapacity for a child over 10. The change ruled out the presumption of incapacity, not the ability of a court to apply the doctrine where appropriate: ‘it must be the presumption that has been abolished.’

Smith LJ, Gross J
[2007] EWHC 946 (Admin), [2007] 4 All ER 628, [2008] 1 WLR 1005
Bailii
Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 11(2), Mental Health Act 1983 37(3), Crime and Disorder Act 1998 34
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRegina (P) v Barking Magistrates Court Admn 2002
P, a 16 year old boy with learning difficulties faced charges. A psychologist said his IQ was so low (52) that P would not be able to understand or reply rationally to the charges. The justices decided that he was fit to plead; they had formed a . .
CitedRex v Pritchard 21-Mar-1836
A person, deaf and dumb, was to be tried for a capital felony the Judge ordered a Jury to be impanneled, to try whether he was mute by the visitation of God, the jury found that he was so. The jury were then sworn to try whether he was able to . .
CitedTP, Regina (on the Application of) v West London Youth Court and others Admn 21-Nov-2005
It had been submitted to the youth court that a boy of 15, with the intellectual capacity of an 8 year old, ought not to face trial. The district judge decided that the trial should proceed and the defendant sought judicial review.
Held: The . .
CitedSC v United Kingdon ECHR 2004
SC when aged 11 was charged with attempted robbery. He had previous convictions, and was committed to the crown court for trial. He applied to stay the proceedings as an abuse of process on account of limited intellectual capacity, and inability . .
CitedWhite, Regina (on the Application of) v the Justices of Barking Magistrates’ Court Admn 25-Feb-2004
A court was correct to refuse to enforce an expectation which was assumed to be otherwise legitimate on the basis that a sentence passed in accordance with that expectation would have been outside the range available to the sentencing court and . .
CitedWhite, Regina (on the Application of) v the Justices of Barking Magistrates’ Court Admn 25-Feb-2004
A court was correct to refuse to enforce an expectation which was assumed to be otherwise legitimate on the basis that a sentence passed in accordance with that expectation would have been outside the range available to the sentencing court and . .
CitedRegina v Horseferry Road Magistrates’ Court, ex Parte Bennett (No 1) HL 24-Jun-1993
The defendant had been brought to the UK in a manner which was in breach of extradition law. He had, in effect, been kidnapped by the authorities.
Held: The High Court may look at how an accused person was brought within the jurisdiction when . .

Cited by:
CitedRegina v T CACD 16-Apr-2008
The twelve year old defendant had pleaded guilty to several allegations of sexual assault. The judge had ruled that it was not open to him to plead doli incapax. He appealed saying that only the presumption of doli incapax had been abolished, and . .
CitedJTB, Regina v HL 29-Apr-2009
The defendant appealed against his convictions for sexual assaults. He was aged twelve at the time of the offences, but had been prevented from arguing that he had not known that what he was doing was wrong. The House was asked whether the effect of . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Crime

Leading Case

Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.251535

Revitt, Borg and Barnes v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 8 Sep 2006

The defendants appealed against refusal of leave to withdraw their pleas of guilty. They argued that the current practice infringed their human rights.
Held: The magistrates had been correct not to allow the defendants to withdraw their pleas. Where a defendant makes an unequivocal plea of guilty which the court accepts, the defendant is thereupon ‘proved guilty according to law’ within the meaning of Article 6(2). The presumption of innocence ceases to apply and he can be sentenced on the basis that he has been proved guilty. A guilty plea can only found a ‘conviction’ and bring to an end the presumption of innocence where it is unequivocal. If it is equivocal, it must be treated as a plea of ‘not guilty’. If after an unequivocal plea of guilty has been made, it becomes apparent that the defendant did not appreciate the elements of the offence to which he was pleading guilty, then it is likely to be appropriate to permit him to withdraw his plea.

Lord Phillips LCJ, Bean J
Times 14-Sep-2006, [2006] EWHC 2266 (Admin), [2006] 1 WLR 3172, [2007] 1 Cr App R 19, [2007] RTR 23, (2006) 170 JP 729
Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights 6
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedS v Recorder of Manchester and Others HL 1971
S, a 16 year old boy pleaded guilty to attempted rape before a juvenile court. The magistrates adjourned the case for inquiry reports. On the adjourned hearing, his legal representative referred to evidence of the boy’s mental condition, and asked . .
CitedX v United Kingdom ECHR 23-Mar-1972
(Commission) The applicant said that having been pressured into pleading guilty: ‘The Commission examined this complaint under Article 6 (1) (Art. 6-1) of the Convention which guarantees the right to a fair trial, and also under Article 6(2) (Art. . .
CitedRegina v Bournemouth Justices, ex parte Maguire 1997
If magistrates having heard an application for leave to withdraw a plea of guilty conclude that the evidence described by the prosecution are not sufficient to find guilt, they may allow the plea to be withdrawn. Kennedy LJ: ‘Of course the court . .
CitedRO v United Kingdom ECHR 11-May-1994
(Commission) The applicant complained that the court had refused to allow him to withdraw his plea of guilty: ‘It is in the first place for the domestic authorities to determine rules regulating procedural aspects of criminal proceedings, subject to . .
CitedRegina v South Tameside Magistrates’ Court, ex parte Rowland 1983
If after the defendant enters an unequivocal plea of guilty it becomes clear that the defendant did not appreciate the elements of the offence to which he was pleading guilty, then it may be appropriate to permit him to withdraw his plea. . .
Adjourned fromRevitt and others v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 17-Jul-2006
Short adjournment. . .

Cited by:
CitedWestminster City Council v Owadally and Another Admn 17-May-2017
Defendant must plea to charge, and not counsel
The defendants had, through their barrister, entered pleas of guilty, but the crown court had declared the convictions invalid because this had to have been done by the defendants personally, and remitted the cases and the confiscation proceedings . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Human Rights

Leading Case

Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.244861

The Republic of Ireland v The United Kingdom: ECHR 18 Jan 1978

The UK lodged a derogation with the Court as regards its human rights obligations in Northern Ireland because of the need to control terroist activity. The Government of Ireland intervened. From August 1971 until December 1975 the UK authorities exercised a series of ‘extrajudicial’ powers of arrest, detention and internment in Northern Ireland. The case concerned the Irish Government’s complaint about the scope and implementation of those measures and in particular the practice of psychological interrogation techniques (wall standing, hooding, subjection to noise and deprivation of sleep, food and drink) during the preventive detention of those detained in connection with acts of terrorism.
Held: The IRA had for a number of years represented ‘a particularly far-reaching and acute danger for the territorial integrity of the United Kingdom, the institutions of the six counties and the lives of the province’s inhabitants’. However, the Court found the methods to have caused intense physical and mental suffering. The article 15 test was accordingly not discussed, but the Court made valuable observations about its role where the application of the article is challenged: ‘(a) The role of the Court. The limits on the Court’s powers of review are particularly apparent where Article 15 is concerned. It falls in the first place to each Contracting State, with its responsibility for ‘the life of [its] nation’, to determine whether that life is threatened by a ‘public emergency’ and, if so, how far it is necessary to go in attempting to overcome the emergency. By reason of their direct and continuous contact with the pressing needs of the moment, the national authorities are in principle in a better position than the international judge to decide both on the presence of such an emergency and on the nature and scope of derogations necessary to avert it. In this matter, Article 15(1) leaves those authorities a wide margin of appreciation. Nevertheless, the States do not enjoy an unlimited power in this respect. The Court, which, with the Commission, is responsible for ensuring the observance of the States’ engagements (Art. 19), is empowered to rule on whether the States have gone beyond the ‘extent strictly required by the exigencies’ of the crisis. The domestic margin of appreciation is thus accompanied by a European supervision.’ Torture is a strong word. In human rights instruments only deliberate inhuman treatment causing very serious and cruel suffering ranks as torture. Ill-treatment must attain a minimum level of severity if it is to fall within the scope of Article 3. The assessment of this minimum is relative; it depends on all the circumstances of the case, such as the duration of the treatment, its physical and mental effects and, in some cases, the sex, age and state of health of the victim.’
ECHR Judgment : Revision rejected : Third Section

G Balladore Pallieri P
5310/71, Series A no 25, p 65, [1978] ECHR 1, (1978) 2 EHRR 25, [2018] ECHR 247
Worldlii, Bailii, Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights 815
Human Rights
Cited by:
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Sivakumar HL 20-Mar-2003
The appellant sought asylum. He had fled Sri Lanka. He was a Tamil and feared torture if he returned. His application had been rejected because the consequences flowed from his suspected involvement in terrorism, and that was not a Convention . .
CitedOsman v The United Kingdom ECHR 28-Oct-1998
Police’s Complete Immunity was Too Wide
(Grand Chamber) A male teacher developed an obsession with a male pupil. He changed his name by deed poll to the pupil’s surname. He was required to teach at another school. The pupil’s family’s property was subjected to numerous acts of vandalism, . .
CitedLorse and Others v The Netherlands ECHR 4-Feb-2003
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 3 with regard to the first applicant ; No violation of Art. 3 with regard to the other applicants ; No violation of Art. 8 ; No violation of Art. 13 . .
CitedA v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 16-Dec-2004
The applicants had been imprisoned and held without trial, being suspected of international terrorism. No criminal charges were intended to be brought. They were foreigners and free to return home if they wished, but feared for their lives if they . .
CitedAdam, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Limbuela v Same; Tesema v Same HL 3-Nov-2005
The applicants had each entered the UK with a view to seeking asylum, but having failed to seek asylum immediately, they had been refused any assistance, were not allowed to work and so had been left destitute. Each had claimed asylum on the day . .
CitedRegina v Bartle and Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Others, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte; Regina v Evans and Similar (No 3) HL 24-Mar-1999
An application to extradite a former head of state for an offence which was not at the time an offence under English law would fail, but could proceed in respect of allegations of acts after that time. No immunity was intended for heads of state. . .
CitedGillan, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Another HL 8-Mar-2006
The defendants said that the stop and search powers granted under the 2000 Act were too wide, and infringed their human rights. Each had been stopped when innocently attending demonstrations in London, and had been effectively detained for about . .
CitedMohamed, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 1) Admn 21-Aug-2008
The claimant had been detained by the US in Guantanamo Bay suspected of terrorist involvement. He sought to support his defence documents from the respondent which showed that the evidence to be relied on in the US courts had been obtained by . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Criminal Practice

Leading Case

Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.164875

Mulosmani v Albania: ECHR 8 Oct 2013

ECHR Article 6
Presumption of innocence
Public accusation of murder made by chairman of independent political party in immediate aftermath of shooting: inadmissible
Facts – In September 1998 a Member of Parliament and his bodyguards were shot and fatally wounded as they came out of the Democratic Party headquarters in Tirana. Immediately afterwards, the Party Chairman, a well-known public figure, went on air accusing the applicant, a police officer, of the crime. It appears that an official Democratic Party press statement was issued later the same day also identifying the applicant as the killer. Over a year later, in December 1999, a district court ordered the applicant’s arrest at the request of the prosecutor investigating the case. Both the district court and the prosecutor expressly noted that the Democratic Party Chairman had mentioned the applicant’s name as being the perpetrator of the crime. The applicant was arrested in May 2001. At his trial he was found guilty of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment.
In his application to the European Court, the applicant complained, inter alia, that the Democratic Party Chairman’s comments in September 1998 had deprived him of the benefit of the presumption of innocence, in breach of Article 6-2 of the Convention.
Law – Article 6-2: The Court reiterated that the presumption of innocence enshrined in Article 6-2 is violated if a statement of a public official concerning a person charged with a criminal offence reflects an opinion that he is guilty before he has been proved so according to law.
In the instant case, however, the Democratic Party Chairman could not be regarded as having acted as a public official within the meaning of Article 6-2. He had not been involved in the criminal investigation into the murder as a police officer, investigator or a prosecutor. He did not hold public office or exercise public authority and, in fact, no powers had been formally delegated to him by any State body. He had acted as a private individual, in his capacity as the chairman of a political party which was legally and financially independent from the State. His statement, which was made in a heated political climate, could be regarded as his party’s condemnation of the MP’s assassination. As such, the mere fact that his actions might have been socially useful in calling for justice to be rendered did not transform him into a public official acting in the public interest.
Conclusion: inadmissible (manifestly ill-founded).
(See also, mutatis mutandis, Kotov v. Russia [GC], 54522/00, 3 April 2012, Information Note 151)
The Court also found that there had been no violation of Article 6-1 and 3 (a) to (d) of the Convention.

29864/03 – Chamber Judgment, [2013] ECHR 924, 29864/03 – Legal Summary, [2013] ECHR 1170
Bailii, Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights
Human Rights

Human Rights, Criminal Practice

Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.518430

Kostovski v The Netherlands: ECHR 20 Nov 1989

No Anonymity for Witnessses in Criminal Trial

K was convicted of armed robbery on the basis of statements of anonymous witnesses. He was unable to question those witnesses at any stage. Being unaware of the identity of the witnesses deprived K of the very particulars which would have enabled him to demonstrate the witnesses unreliability.
Held: There had been a violation of article 6(3)(d) where the court treated the statements of anonymous witnesses, who had been examined in the absence of the accused and his representatives, as sufficient proof of guilt of armed robbery. The Court explained its approach: ‘In principle, all the evidence must be produced in the presence of the accused at a public hearing with a view to adversarial argument. This does not mean, however, that in order to be used as evidence statements of witnesses should always be made at a public hearing in court: to use as evidence such statements obtained at the pre-trial stage is not in itself inconsistent with paragraphs (3)(d) and (1) of Article 6, provided the rights of the defence have been respected.
As a rule, these rights require that an accused should be given an adequate and proper opportunity to challenge and question a witness against him, either at the time the witness was making his statement or at some later stage of the proceedings.’ and ‘The right to a fair administration of justice holds so prominent a place in a democratic society that it cannot be sacrificed to expediency. The Convention does not preclude reliance at the investigation stage of criminal proceedings on sources such anonymous informants. However, the subsequent use of anonymous statements as sufficient evidence to found a conviction as in the present case is a different matter. It involved limitations on the right of the defence which were irreconcilable with the guarantees contained in Article 6.’

[1990] ECHR 8, [1989] ECHR 20, 11454/85, (1989) 12 EHRR 434, [1989] ECHR 20
Worldlii, Worldlii, Bailii, Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights 6(3)(d)
Human Rights
Citing:
CitedDoorson v The Netherlands ECHR 26-Mar-1996
Evidence was given in criminal trials by anonymous witnesses and evidence was also read as a result of a witness having appeared at the trial but then absconded. The defendant was convicted of drug trafficking. As regards the anonymous witnesses, . .

Cited by:
CitedD (A Minor), Regina (on the Application of) v Camberwell Green Youth Court HL 27-Jan-2005
The defendant challenged the obligatory requirement that evidence given by a person under 17 in sex or violent offence cases must normally be given by video link.
Held: The purpose of the section was to improve the quality of the evidence . .
CitedSellick and Sellick, Regina v CACD 14-Mar-2005
The defendants appealed convictions for murder saying that the court had had read to it the statements of four witnesses who refused to attend for fear, having been intimidated. Other witnesses had been unco-operative and had been treated by the . .
IllustrativeClingham (formerly C (a minor)) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea; Regina v Crown Court at Manchester Ex parte McCann and Others HL 17-Oct-2002
The applicants had been made subject of anti-social behaviour orders. They challenged the basis upon which the orders had been made.
Held: The orders had no identifiable consequences which would make the process a criminal one. Civil standards . .
CitedRoberts v Parole Board HL 7-Jul-2005
Balancing Rights of Prisoner and Society
The appellant had been convicted of the murder of three police officers in 1966. His tariff of thirty years had now long expired. He complained that material put before the Parole Board reviewing has case had not been disclosed to him.
Held: . .
CitedAG for the Sovereign Base Areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia v Steinhoff PC 19-Jul-2005
(Akrotiri and Dhekelia) The defendant had appealed convictions for rape and attempted rape. He had criticised the arrangements for protecting the complainant when giving evidence, which had not complied with the 1999 Act. His appeal succeeded in . .
CitedAl-Khawaja v Regina CACD 3-Nov-2005
The defendant had been tried for indecent assaults. The complainant having died before the trial, the judge had ruled that her written statements were admissible. The defendant said he had not had a fair trial.
Held: The appeal failed. The . .
CitedGrant v The Queen PC 16-Jan-2006
(Jamaica) The defendant appealed his conviction for murder saying that the admission of an unsworn statement by one witness and the non-admission of another similar statement who did not either attend court was unconstitutional. He shot the victim . .
CitedRegina v Davis (Iain); Regina v Ellis, Regina v Gregory, Regina v Simms, Regina v Martin CACD 19-May-2006
The several defendants complained at the use at their trials of evidence given anonymously. The perceived need for anonymity arose because, from intimidation, the witnesses would not be willing to give their evidence without it.
Held: The . .
CitedSecretary of State for the Home Department v MB; Same v AF HL 31-Oct-2007
Non-derogating control orders – HR Compliant
MB and AF challenged non-derogating control orders made under the 2005 Act, saying that they were incompatible with their human rights. AF was subject to a curfew of 14 hours a day, wore an electronic tag at all times, could not leave a nine square . .
CitedRegina v Davis HL 18-Jun-2008
The defendant had been tried for the murder of two men by shooting them at a party. He was identified as the murderer by three witnesses who had been permitted to give evidence anonymously, from behind screens, because they had refused, out of fear, . .
CitedAl-Khawaja v The United Kingdom; Tahery v The United Kingdom ECHR 20-Jan-2009
Each complainant said that in allowing hearsay evidence to be used against them at their trials, their article 6 human rights had been infringed. In the first case the complainant had died before trial but her statement was admitted.
Held: In . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Criminal Practice

Leading Case

Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.165041

Lamont-Perkins v Royal Society for The Prevention of Cruelty To Animals (RSPCA): Admn 24 Apr 2012

The defendant had been convicted of animal cruelty. She appealed to the Crown Court, and now appealed against rulings made by the judge as to the time limits for a prosecution under the 2006 Act in the Magistrates Court. She said that the RSPCA conducting a private prosecution was not a ‘prosecutor’ able to take the benefit of section 31 of the 2006 Act. She argued that the power under section 31 of the 2006 Act to certify conclusively for the purposes of limitation when matters came to the prosecutor’s knowledge was a power that was restricted to state prosecutors and not to private prosecutors.
Held: After a review of the provisions of the Act, the power was a power available to all prosecutors.
The phrase ‘the prosecutor’ in section 31 of the 2006 Act is not limited to prosecutors who prosecute pursuant to a power conferred by some statutory provision but applies to anyone who initiates a prosecution under the Act. The absence of a remedy by way of judicial review against a private prosecutor was not a basis to conclude that section 31 was to be interpreted so as to exclude private prosecutors from its ambit. The magistrates’ court in which a prosecution is brought can investigate whether or not the proceedings have been brought within the time limit specified in section 31 of the Act and it can also investigate whether any certificate issued under section 31(2) should be treated as conclusive of the facts stated therein. Once an appropriate procedure exists for contending that the prosecutor has not brought proceedings within time or that the certificate issued under section 31(2) should not be treated as conclusive evidence of the facts stated therein the absence of a remedy by way of judicial review loses much of its significance.

Sir John Thomas P
[2012] EWHC 1002 (Admin)
Bailii
Animal Welfare Act 2006 4 31, Magistrates’ Court Act 1980 127(10
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedKerr v John Mottram Ltd ChD 1940
The court considered an application by a shareholder of a company to enforce an alleged contract for the sale of shares that he claimed were offered to him at a meeting of the company. The minutes of the company meeting did not support the . .
CitedRegina v Haringey Magistrates’ Court ex parte Amvrosiou Admn 13-Jun-1996
When the appellant appeared at the Magistrates’ Court to answer a charge of driving whilst uninsured, a preliminary point was taken on her behalf that the prosecution had not been commenced within 6 months of the date on which evidence sufficient in . .
CitedTerra Woningen BV v The Netherlands ECHR 17-Dec-1996
A court had considered itself bound by a decision of the Provincial Executive within the Netherlands adverse to the applicant company.
Held: That was in breach of article 6(1). There was not access to a tribunal with sufficient jurisdiction to . .
CitedMorgans v Director of Public Prosecutions QBD 29-Dec-1998
The defendant argued that once the prosecutor had all the material on which the prosecution was eventually brought, then for the purposes of section 11(2) time began to run.
Held: When considering the time limits for a prosecution under the . .
CitedMorgans v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 18-Feb-2000
Without a warrant, the police had arranged for a call logger to retain details of the calls made, including the number called, time and duration. The dialing itself was a communication, which established a connection, through which further . .
CitedBurwell v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 1-May-2009
The defendant appealed against the decision of the Magistrates to accept a prosecutor’s certificate as to compliance with time limits for commencing the prosecution. He argued that the police had all the evidence in their possession at an earlier . .

Cited by:
AppliedBrowning v Lewes Crown Court and RSPCA Admn 24-Apr-2012
The claimant appealed against the refusal by the respondent to state a case regarding its conviction of the claimant of offences under the 2006 Act.
Held: In view of the case of Perkins, the application failed save that the Crown Court should . .
CitedVirgin Media Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Zinga CACD 24-Jan-2014
Zinga had been convicted of conspiracy to defraud in a private prosecution brought by Virgin Media. After dismissal of the appeal against conviction, Virgin pursued confiscation proceedings. Zinga appealed against refusal of its argument that it was . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Animals, Magistrates, Criminal Practice

Leading Case

Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.452904

Director of Public Prosecutions v Alexander: Admn 27 Jul 2010

The defendant had crashed his car after driving off with a girl, and while being chased by another car driven by her boyfriend. The police first cautioned him for false imprisonment, but then prosecuted him for careless driving. The prosecutor appealed against a successful plea of autrefois convict. The defendant said that the offence for which he was cautioned and the summons he now faced were the same incident.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The offences were different. In the one case the offence was the manner of driving, and the other the detention of the woman. The victims were different, and the modes of trial were different, so that in some circumstances there would have been two trials. Nor was any explicit promise given by the police.

Stanley Burnton LJ, Treacy, Nicol JJ
[2010] EWHC 2266 (Admin), (2010) 174 JP 519, [2010] ACD 98
Bailii
Road Traffic Act 1988 3, Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedConnelly v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 1964
Plea of Autrefois Acquit is Narrow in Scope
The defendant had been tried for and acquitted of murder. The prosecution then sought to have him tried for robbery out of the same alleged facts. The House considered his plea of autrefois convict.
Held: The majority identified a narrow . .
CitedPhipps, Regina v CACD 14-Jan-2005
The appellant had been convicted of driving with excess alcohol. After complaints by the injured victim’s family he was further prosecuted for dangerous driving. He now appealed his conviction, having pleaded guilty when the judge failed to find an . .
CitedNicholas v Chester Magistrates Court Admn 11-Jun-2009
The claimant sought judicial review of a refusal by the respondents to state a case. . .
CitedGore, Regina v; Regina v Maher CACD 14-Jul-2009
The defendants appealed aginst their convictions for inflicting grievous bodily harm. When first arrested they had been issued with fixed penalty tickets for much lesser offences. The police officers did not anticipate the seriousness of the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic, Criminal Practice

Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.424081

E and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 10 Jun 2011

Judicial review was sought of a decision by the respondent to prosecute a child for her alleged sexual abuse of her younger sisters. Agencies other than the police and CPS considered that a prosecution would harm both the applicant and her sisters. It was said that the applicant had herself been groomed by an adult to commit the offences. Nevertheless the respondent had found the evidentiary and public interest tests satisfied.
Held: The request for review succeeded. It was for the DPP and not the court to decide CPS policies. The court’s duties are restricted to testing the lawfulness of a policy. It was impossible to say the policy applied was unlawful.
However the policy had not been correctly applied. The strategy group considering the case had specifically recommended against prosecution for several strong reasons: ‘the decision letter simply does not engage at all with what the report had said, in very plain and concerning terms, about the adverse effects on the welfare of all three children of the decision to prosecute’. The claim succeeded on this point.
The challenge to the decision itself as a disproportionate response failed.
Though such a case should normally be brought within the criminal system, in this case the victims themselves had applied, and since they could only apply in the Administrative Court and since the claims related to the same issues, the entire claim had been properly brought.

Munby LJ, McCombe J
[2011] EWHC 1465 (Admin), [2012] Crim LR 39, [2012] 1 Cr App R 6
Bailii
Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 10, United Nations 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child 3.1 39, United Nations 1985 Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice, Sexual Offences Act 2003
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRegina v Chief Constable of Kent ex parte L 1991
The discretion which is vested in the Crown Prosecution Service to continue criminal proceedings commenced by the police is subject to judicial review by the High Court, but only where it can be shown that the decision was made regardless of, or . .
CitedC v Director of Public Prosecutions; Regina v Director of Public Prosecutions ex parte C 1995
A CPS decision not to prosecute was quashed because the decision-maker had failed to have regard to one of the matters identified in the relevant part of The Code for Crown Prosecutors. . .
CitedZH (Tanzania) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 1-Feb-2011
The respondent had arrived and claimed asylum. Three claims were rejected, two of which were fraudulent. She had two children by a UK citizen, and if deported the result would be (the father being unsuitable) that the children would have to return . .
CitedSuppiah and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department Admn 11-Jan-2011
Wyn Williams J said: ‘a policy which is in principle capable of being implemented lawfully but which nonetheless gives rise to an unacceptable risk of unlawful decision-making is itself an unlawful policy.’ . .
CitedPiglowska v Piglowski HL 24-Jun-1999
No Presumption of House for both Parties
When looking to the needs of parties in a divorce, there is no presumption that both parties are to be left able to purchase alternative homes. The order of sub-clauses in the Act implies nothing as to their relative importance. Courts should be . .
CitedLM and Others v Regina; Regina v M(L), B(M) and G(D) CACD 21-Oct-2010
Each defendant appealed saying that being themselves the victims of people trafficking, the prosecutions had failed to take into account its obligations under the Convention.
Held: Prosecutors had ‘a three-stage exercise of judgment. The first . .
CitedCorner House Research and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v The Serious Fraud Office HL 30-Jul-2008
SFO Director’s decisions reviewable
The director succeeded on his appeal against an order declaring unlawful his decision to discontinue investigations into allegations of bribery. The Attorney-General had supervisory duties as to the exercise of the duties by the Director. It had . .
CitedV v The United Kingdom; T v The United Kingdom ECHR 16-Dec-1999
The claimant challenged to the power of the Secretary of State to set a tariff where the sentence was imposed pursuant to section 53(1). The setting of the tariff was found to be a sentencing exercise which failed to comply with Article 6(1) of the . .
CitedC, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice CA 28-Jul-2008
The court was asked as to what methods of physical restraint were proper in institutions accommodating youths in custody.
Held: The Court had been wrong not to quash the amended rules on the grounds of procedural breaches. The amended rules . .
CitedChief Constable of Kent County Constabulary v Baskerville CA 3-Sep-2003
The claimant sought damages for sex discrimination by fellow police officers in an action against the Chief Constable. The Chief Constable said he was liable for the unlawful acts of fellow officers.
Held: Anything done by an employee was done . .
CitedRegina v Director of Public Prosecutions, ex parte Kebilene and others HL 28-Oct-1999
(Orse Kebeline) The DPP’s appeal succeeded. A decision by the DPP to authorise a prosecution could not be judicially reviewed unless dishonesty, bad faith, or some other exceptional circumstance could be shown. A suggestion that the offence for . .
CitedH and L v A City Council CA 14-Apr-2011
The court was asked when and how it is proper for a local authority to make disclosure to someone’s commercial contacts of the fact that he is a convicted sex offender.
Held: Where human rights are involved, the appropriate standard of review . .
CitedRe E (A Child); E v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary and Another (Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission and others intervening) HL 12-Nov-2008
(Northern Ireland) Children had been taken to school in the face of vehement protests from Loyalists. The parents complained that the police had failed to protect them properly, since the behaviour was so bad as to amount to inhuman or degrading . .
CitedRegina v G (Secretary of State for the Home Department intervening) HL 18-Jun-2008
The defendant was fifteen. He was convicted of statutory rape of a 13 year old girl, believing her to be 15. He appealed saying that as an offence of strict liability he had been denied a right to a fair trial, and also that the offence charged was . .
CitedUlke v Turkey ECHR 24-Jan-2006
A prosecution was held to breach Article 3. The applicant had been convicted for the eighth time of offences relating to his conscientious objection to military service in circumstances where he was, despite his convictions, not exempted from his . .
CitedRegina (on the Application of Gjovalin Pepushi) v Crown Prosecution Service Admn 11-May-2004
The claimant was stopped when boarding a flight to Canada, having previously stopped in France and Italy. He bore a false Swedish passport, and intended to claim asylum in Canada. He now claimed the benefit of the article 31 (per Adimi), to defend a . .
CitedPretty v The United Kingdom ECHR 29-Apr-2002
Right to Life Did Not include Right to Death
The applicant was paralysed and suffered a degenerative condition. She wanted her husband to be allowed to assist her suicide by accompanying her to Switzerland. English law would not excuse such behaviour. She argued that the right to die is not . .
CitedBensaid v The United Kingdom ECHR 6-Feb-2001
The applicant was a schizophrenic and an illegal immigrant. He claimed that his removal to Algeria would deprive him of essential medical treatment and sever ties that he had developed in the UK that were important for his well-being. He claimed . .

Cited by:
CitedSXH v The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) SC 11-Apr-2017
The Court was asked: ‘Does a decision by a public prosecutor to bring criminal proceedings against a person fall potentially within the scope of article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights in circumstances where a) the prosecutor has . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Children

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.440576

K, Regina v: CACD 28 Jul 2009

The defendant appealed against orders allowing the use in evidence against him of information provided by him in ancillary relief proceedings, and without prejudice negotations with his wife’s solicitors.
Held: The information provided through the formal ancillary relief process had been obtained under compulsion, and the rules had been intended to require full disclosure and to have abrogated the privilege against self-incrimination within those proceedings. That so, the information should not be admissible in criminal proceedings: ‘the admission of evidence obtained from the accused under threat of imprisonment was not a reasonable and proportionate response to the social need to punish and deter tax evasion so as to justify such an infringement of the right of the accused not to incriminate himself.’ As to the without prejudice material, that was admissible since the crown had not been a party to those negotiations. Here the public interest in prosecuting crime was sufficiently strong to justify the setting aside the protection of the information disclosed in those negotiations. If particular circumstances would make its admission unfair, a trial judge might still exclude it under the 1984 Act.

Lord Justice Moore-Bick, Mr Justice Holman and Mrs Justice Rafferty
[2009] EWCA Crim 1640, Times 19-Aug-2009, [2009] STI 2197, [2010] 2 WLR 905, [2010] QB 343, [2010] 1 Cr App Rep 3, [2009] STC 2553, [2009] 3 FCR 341, [2009] Lloyd’s Rep FC 644, [2009] Fam Law 1136, [2010] 1 QB 343
Bailii
Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 29(1), Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 23 24, Family Proceedings Rules 1991 (SI 1991 No 1247), Criminal Justice Act 2003 118(1), European Convention on Human Rights 6, police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 78
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedSaunders v The United Kingdom ECHR 17-Dec-1996
(Grand Chamber) The subsequent use against a defendant in a prosecution, of evidence which had been obtained under compulsion in company insolvency procedures was a convention breach of Art 6. Although not specifically mentioned in Article 6 of the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Family, Human Rights

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.365623

X and Y v The Netherlands: ECHR 26 Mar 1985

A parent complained to the police about a sexual assault on his daughter a mentally defective girl of 16. The prosecutor’s office decided not to prosecute provided the accused did not repeat the offence. X appealed against the decision and requested the court to direct that proceedings be brought. The appeal was dismissed partly on the ground that although the girl was incapable of making the complaint herself, no one else was entitled to complain on her behalf. The claim was brought under Article 8, the right to private and family life.
Held: There was a violation of Article 8. No prosecution could be instituted because of a ‘procedural obstacle which the Dutch legislature had apparently not foreseen’, that obstacle being the Dutch law provision which meant that, although the applicant was unable herself to present her case in court due to her mental handicap no one else was entitled to complain on her behalf. The term ‘private life’ covers the physical and psychological integrity of a person.

8978/80, (1985) 8 EHRR 235, [1985] ECHR 4
Worldlii, Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights 8
Cited by:
CitedX, A Woman Formerly Known As Mary Bell v Stephen O’Brien, News Group Newspapers Ltd MGN Ltd QBD 21-May-2003
An injunction effective against the world, was granted to restrain any act to identify the claimant in the media, including the Internet. She had been convicted of murder when a child, and had since had a child herself. An order had been granted . .
CitedC Plc and W v P and Secretary of State for the Home Office and the Attorney General ChD 26-May-2006
cplc_pChD2006
The claimant sought damages from the first defendant for breach of copyright. An ex parte search order had been executed, with the defendant asserting his privilege against self-incrimination. As computer disks were examined, potentially unlawful . .
CitedClift v Slough Borough Council and Another QBD 6-Jul-2009
clift_sloughQBD09
The claimant sought damages for defamation. The council had decided that she had threatened a member of staff and notified various people, and entered her name on a violent persons register. She alleged malice, the council pleaded justification and . .
CitedPearce v Mayfield School CA 31-Jul-2001
The claimant teacher was a lesbian. She complained that her school in failed to protect her against abuse from pupils for her lesbianism. She appealed against a decision that the acts of the pupils did not amount to discrimination, and that the . .
CitedIn re W (Children) (Family proceedings: Evidence) (Abuse: Oral Evidence) SC 3-Mar-2010
The court considered the approach to be taken when considering whether to order a child’s attendance at court in care proceedings. It was argued that the starting point of assuming that a child should not attend, failed to respect the human right to . .
CitedGujra, Regina (on The Application of) v Crown Prosecution Service SC 14-Nov-2012
The appellant had twice begun private prosecutions only to have them taken over by the CPS and discontinued. He complained that a change in their policy on such interventions interfered with his statutory and constitutional right to bring such a . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Criminal Practice

Leading Case

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.164944

Mitcham v The Queen: PC 16 Mar 2009

(Saint Christopher and Nevis) The applicant appealed against his sentence of death following his conviction for murder. He had been granted a stay of execution pending the appeal to the board and had since been given leave to appeal against sentence. The defendant said that the jury heard the beginning of an intervention suggesting threats by him against a witness.
Held: The appeal should be dismissed. The judge had handled it correctly. The danger was minimal, and a direction could have given greater emphasis.

Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Lord Carswell
[2008] UKPC 7
Bailii
Commonwealth
Citing:
CitedMitchell v The Queen PC 24-Jan-1998
(Bahamas) The judge’s decision on a voire dire to determine the admissibility of a confession should not be revealed to the jury since it might cause unfair prejudice to the defendant by conveying the impression that the judge had reached a . .
CitedRegina v Azam, Altaf and Hussain CACD 22-Feb-2006
The court considered whether an event might prejudice a fair trial, even if counsel do not raise the issue. The court dismissed the defendant’s appeals. In doing so it stated that too many counsel had been instructed. Leading and junior counsel had . .
CitedRegina v Lawson, Adderson, Johnson, Jones, and Roberts CACD 24-Jan-2005
The defendants appealed convictions for conspiracy to import cannabis resin. The prosecution had been refused consent to present certain evidence, but the judge went on later to refer to material from the excluded evidence in his summing up.
CitedRegina v Docherty CACD 1999
The defendant was accused of a sexual assault. A witness referred to his having been in prison. The trial judge refused to discharge the jury, stating that the remark could well have been taken to mean that that the defendant was a dishonest person . .
CitedMillar v Dickson PC 24-Jul-2001
The Board was asked whether the appellants had waived their right to an independent and impartial tribunal under article 6 of the Convention by appearing before the temporary sheriffs without objecting to their hearing their cases on the ground that . .
CitedPorter and Weeks v Magill HL 13-Dec-2001
Councillors Liable for Unlawful Purposes Use
The defendant local councillors were accused of having sold rather than let council houses in order to encourage an electorate which would be more likely to be supportive of their political party. They had been advised that the policy would be . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.320879

Gregory v The United Kingdom: ECHR 25 Feb 1997

gregory_ukECHR1997

A judge’s direction to the jury to disregard any question of racial bias was sufficient to ensure a fair trial for the defendant. In discussing the protection of the secrecy of jury deliberations: ‘The court acknowledges that the rule governing the secrecy of jury deliberations is a crucial and legitimate feature of English trial law which serves to reinforce the jury’s role as the ultimate arbiter of fact and to guarantee open and frank deliberations among jurors on the evidence which they have heard.’
and ‘according to the constant case law of the Convention organs, the existence of impartiality must be determined according to a subjective test, namely, on the basis of a personal conviction of a particular judge in a given case – personal impartiality being assumed until there is proof to the contrary.
In addition, an objective test must be applied. It must be ascertained whether sufficient guarantees exist to exclude any legitimate doubt in this respect. Even appearances may be important: what is at stake is the confidence which the court must inspire in the accused in criminal proceedings and what is decisive is whether the applicant’s fear as to lack of impartiality can be regarded as objectively justifiable.’
Hudoc The Court recognised that it was possible for a risk of prejudice on the part of a jury to be effectively neutralised by an appropriate direction from the judge. The legal principles applied in England corresponded closely to its own case law on the objective requirements of impartiality.

Times 27-Feb-1997, 22299/93, (1997) 25 EHRR 577, [1997] ECHR 9
Worldlii, Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights Art 6.1
Cited by:
DistinguishedRegina v Qureshi CACD 23-Jul-2001
The appellant had been convicted of arson. A few days after the conviction, one juror reported concern about the behaviour of the jury.
Held: Authority was clear, that the court could not enter into an investigation of what had happened with . .
DistinguishedRegina v Smith (Lance Percival) CACD 19-Feb-2003
The defendant argued that the judge should have ensured that some members of the jury were black. He was a black man being tried by an all white jury, with a white victim and white witnesses.
Held: The judge had no part to play in the . .
CitedRegina v Connor and another; Regina v Mirza HL 22-Jan-2004
The defendants sought an enquiry as to events in the jury rooms on their trials. They said that the secrecy of a jury’s deliberations did not fit the human right to a fair trial. In one case, it was said that jurors believed that the defendant’s use . .
CitedIn Re Medicaments and Related Classes of Goods (No 2); Director General of Fair Trading v Proprietary Association of Great Britain and Proprietary Articles Trade Association CA 21-Dec-2000
The claimants alleged that a connection between a member of the Restrictive Practices Court, who was to hear a complaint and another company, disclosed bias against them. She had not recused herself.
Held: When asking whether material . .
CitedAttorney General v Scotcher HL 19-May-2005
Following a trial, a juror wrote to the defendant’s mother to say that other jury members had not considered the case in a proper manner. He had been given written advice that he was not free to discuss a case with anyone. He appealed his conviction . .
CitedRegina v Khan and Hanif CACD 14-Mar-2008
Each defendant appealed against his conviction saying that the presence on the jury of certain people involved in the law gave the appearance of bias.
Held: The court should be made aware if any potential juror either is or has been a police . .
CitedHM Attorney General v Seckerson and Times Newspapers Ltd Admn 13-May-2009
The first defendant had been foreman of a jury in a criminal trial. He was accused of disclosing details of the jury’s votes and their considerations with concerns about the expert witnesses to the second defendant. The parties disputed the extent . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Discrimination, Human Rights

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.165487

Regina v Abu Hamza: CACD 28 Nov 2006

The defendant had faced trial on terrorist charges. He claimed that delay and the very substantial adverse publicity had made his fair trial impossible, and that it was not an offence for a foreign national to solicit murders to be carried out abroad.
Held: The appeal failed. Murder is singled out as an offence even when committed outside the jurisdiction is no doubt the particularly serious nature. Everything points to giving the words of section 4 of the 1861 Act the broad meaning that they naturally bear having regard to the unique extra-territorial jurisdiction long established in relation to that crime. The offence was correctly charged. The acts of the authorities fell a long way short of amounting an abuse of process.
As to the effects of the publicity, reliance should be placed on the jury supported by a direction from the judge: ‘The risk that members of a jury may be affected by prejudice is one that cannot wholly be eliminated. Any member may bring personal prejudices to the jury room and equally there will be a risk that a jury may disregard the directions of the judge when they consider that they are contrary to what justice requires. Our legal principles are designed to reduce such risks to the minimum, but they cannot obviate them altogether if those reasonably suspected of criminal conduct are to be brought to trial. The requirement that a viable alternative verdict be left to the jury is beneficial in reducing the risk that the jury may not decide the case in accordance with the directions of the judge. Prejudicial publicity renders more difficult the task of the court, that is of the judge and jury together, in trying the case fairly. Our laws of contempt of court are designed to prevent the media from interfering with the due process of justice by making it more difficult to conduct a fair trial. The fact, however, that adverse publicity may have risked prejudicing a fair trial is no reason for not proceeding with the trial if the judge concludes that, with his assistance, it will be possible to have a fair trial. In considering this question it is right for the judge to have regard to his own experience and that of his fellow judges as to the manner in which juries normally perform their duties. ‘
Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, Lord Chief Justice said: ‘circumstances can exist where it will be an abuse of process to prosecute a man for conduct in respect of which he has been given an assurance that no prosecution will be brought. It is by no means easy to define a test for those circumstances other than to say that they must be such as to render the proposed prosecution an affront to justice . . Only in rare circumstances will it be offensive to justice to give effect to [the public interest that those who are reasonably suspected of criminal conduct should be brought to trial]. Such circumstances can arise if the police, who are carrying out a criminal investigation, give an unequivocal assurance that a suspect will not be prosecuted and the suspect, in reliance on that undertaking, acts to his detriment.’

Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, Lord Chief Justice, Mr Justice Penry-Davey and Mr Justice Pitchford
[2006] EWCA Crim 2918, Times 30-Nov-2006, [2007] 2 WLR 226, [2007] 3 All ER 451, [2007] 1 Cr App R 27
Bailii
Terrorism Act 2000 58, Public Order Act 1986 818(1), Offences Against the Person Act 1861 4, Criminal Law Act 1977 1(1)
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedBoard of Trade v Owen HL 1957
The defendants appealed their convictions under common law for a conspiracy to defraud. The conspiracy was within the jurisdiction but the intended fraudulent acts would happen in Germany. The Court of Appeal quashed the convictions for conspiracy. . .
CitedRegina v Serva and nine others 26-Jul-1845
The court considered the meaning of the phrase ”against the peace of the King’
Held: The phrase applies to the offender: it relates to his capacity to commit the crime. . .
CitedRegina v Page CMAC 1954
The defendant, a corporal in the Royal Corps of Signals had been tried and convicted by a Court Martial in Egypt for the murder of an Egyptian national in an Egyptian village. The issue in the appeal was whether a Court Martial had jurisdiction . .
CitedRegina v Bernard 1858
The defendant alien faced charges arising from alleged conduct within the jurisdiction, with being an accessory before the fact to the murder in Paris of people killed by a grenade thrown by an alien. Questions of law reserved included the question . .
CitedAntonelli v Barberi 1907
The defendant was charged with encouraging persons unknown to murder a foreign soverign. . .
CitedTreacy v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 1970
Blackmail was alleged under section 21 of the 1968 Act, the letter making the unwarranted demand with menaces having been posted from England to an intended victim in Germany.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. To allow an English court to have . .
CitedThe Queen v Boutzeff 1898
. .
CitedRegina v Tchorzoewski 1858
The defendant was accused of inciting the murder of the Emperor of France. The Attorney -General asked the court to accept undertakings from the defendant on entry of a directed verdict of not guilty.
Held: The undertakings were accepted: Lord . .
CitedRegina v Most 1881
(Court of Crown Cases Reserved) A count on the indictment alleged that the defendant: ‘knowingly and wickedly did encourage certain persons, whose names to the jurors were unknown, to murder certain other persons, to wit sovereigns and rulers of . .
CitedRegina v Croydon Justices Ex Parte Dean QBD 9-Mar-1993
The applicant a 17 year old assisted the police in a murder investigation on the understanding, induced by the police, that he would not himself be prosecuted. Some weeks later, at the instance of the CPS, the applicant was charged with a lesser . .
CitedRegina v Townsend and Others CACD 8-May-1997
Where a defendant has been induced to believe that he will not be prosecuted, this is capable of founding a stay for abuse; where he then co-operates with the prosecution in a manner which results in manifest prejudice to him, it will become . .
CitedRegina v Bloomfield CACD 25-Jun-1996
It was an abuse of process to proceed with a prosecution in the face of an unequivocal statement by counsel for the Crown to the Court that the prosecution would tender no evidence. There was no change of circumstances which might have justified . .
CitedRegina v Horseferry Road Magistrates’ Court, ex Parte Bennett (No 1) HL 24-Jun-1993
The defendant had been brought to the UK in a manner which was in breach of extradition law. He had, in effect, been kidnapped by the authorities.
Held: The High Court may look at how an accused person was brought within the jurisdiction when . .
CitedRegina v Kray CACD 1969
The court dealt with a case where prejudice was claimed on behalf of the defendant because of publicity before the trial. Lawton J said: ‘The drama of a trial almost always has the effect of excluding from recollection that which went before.’
CitedRegina v Coutts HL 19-Jul-2006
The defendant was convicted of murder. Evidence during the trial suggested a possibility of manslaughter, but neither the defence nor prosecution proposed the alternate verdict. The defendant now appealed saying that the judge had an independent . .
CitedIn the matter of B CACD 2006
The court recommended reliance on the good sense of juries: ‘There is a feature of our trial system which is sometimes overlooked or taken for granted. The collective experience of this constitution as well as the previous constitution of the court, . .
CitedAttorney-General’s Reference (No 2 of 2001) HL 11-Dec-2003
The house was asked whether it might be correct to stay criminal proceedings as an abuse where for delay. The defendants were prisoners in a prison riot in 1998. The case only came on for trial in 2001, when they submitted that the delay was an . .
CitedRegina v Coughlan and Young CACD 1976
Coughlan and Young were convicted at Birmingham Crown Court of conspiracy to cause explosions in the United Kingdom, the prosecution having limited the allegation to explosions in Birmingham and its neighbourhood. Charges had been brought in respect . .
CitedKakis v Government of the Republic of Cyprus HL 1978
Kakis’ extradition was sought by Cyprus in relation to an EOKA killing in April 1973. Although a warrant for Kakis’ arrest had been issued that very night, he had escaped into the mountains and remained hidden for 15 months. Subsequently, he settled . .
CitedRegina v Maxwell CACD 1988
The defendant admitted paying two others to burgle his partner’s home, but said he had not anticipated violence, and appealed against his conviction for robbery, saying the judge should have left the alternative verdict to the jury. The jury, during . .
CitedMontgomery and Coulter v Her Majesty’s Advocate PC 19-Oct-2000
The test of whether a defendant’s common law right to a fair trial had been damaged by pre-trial publicity was similar to the test under the Convention, and also where there was any plea of oppression. The substantial difference is that no balancing . .
CitedRegina v West (Rosemary) CACD 3-Apr-1996
Payments to witnesses in criminal trials by media need investigation and control. Nevertheless, the fact that a number of witnesses had sold their stories to the media before the trial, which was disclosed to the defence before or during the trial, . .
CitedRegina v Taylor and Another CACD 15-Jun-1993
In June 1991 Mrs Shaughnessy was stabbed to death at home. In July 1992 the Taylor sisters were convicted of that murder. An investigating police officer had suppressed an inconsistent statement made by a highly material witness, and there was also . .
CitedRegina v Maxwell HL 1990
The defendant had hired two men to enter his former partner’s house to commit robbery. It was his defence that he did not contemplate violence, and that he was only guilty of the offence of burglary. The prosecution would not add a count of burglary . .
CitedRegina v Central Criminal Court ex parte The Telegraph Plc CACD 1993
The court considered the effect of a jury trial in balancing pre-trial prejudicial publicity. Lord Taylor CJ said: ‘In determining whether publication of matter would cause a substantial risk of prejudice to a future trial, a court should credit the . .
CitedRegina v McCann and Others CACD 1991
The defendants were alleged to be members of the IRA who had been found near to the home of Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. They were charged with conspiracy to murder. They did not give evidence. During closing speeches in a terrorist . .

Cited by:
CitedHM Attorney General v British Broadcasting Corporation CA 12-Mar-2007
The police were conducting a major investigation into suspected awards of state honours in return for cash and associated events. The AG had obtained an order restraining the defendant and other media from reporting allegations that one person was . .
CitedGuest v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 5-Mar-2009
The claimant, the victim of an alleged assault, challenged the failure of the respondent to quash a conditional caution given to the assailant. The respondent accepted that a decision to prosecute would have been appropriate.
Held: The offence . .
CitedAbdul and Others v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 16-Feb-2011
The defendants appealed against convictions for using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour or disorderly behaviour . . within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress. He had attended a . .
CitedSmith, Regina (on The Application of) v Crown Prosecution Service Admn 24-Nov-2010
The claimant sought judicial review of the defendant’s refusal to discontinue the prosecution of the claimant. The judge had suggested that the defendant could submit to a restraining order without a finding of guilt. The CPS had concluded that no . .
CitedHM Attorney General v MGN Ltd and Another Admn 29-Jul-2011
The police arrested a man on suspicion of the murder of a young woman. He was later released and exonerated, and a second man arrested and later convicted. Whilst the first was in custody the two defendant newspapers, the Daily Mirror and the Sun . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Leading Case

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.246768

John v The State: PC 16 Mar 2009

(Trinidad and Tobago) The defendant appealed his conviction for murder. The evidence against him was of identification by a man, also criminally involved, who had been given immunity. No identification parade was held.
Held: It was clear from other evidence that the witness was identifying someone he already knew, and an identification parade would have been of less importance. There should still have been an identification parade. There was nothing to lose, and this was a capital murder case. The defect was however cured by the full and fair summing up. (Baroness Hale of Richmond dissenting)

Lord Hoffmann, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Baroness Hale of Richmond, Lord Brown of Eaton-Under-Heywood, Sir Jonathan Parker
[2009] UKPC 9
Bailii
Commonwealth
Citing:
CitedRegina v Conway CACD 1990
A witness said that she knew the accused, had seen him in a public house and entertained him to dinner, but did not know his name, where he lived, or anything of importance about him. No identification parade had been held despite the accused having . .
CitedRegina v Fergus CACD 29-Jun-1993
A judge should withdraw a case which was based on poor identification evidence, and the prosecution must be sure to disclose all identification evidence. ‘In a case dependent on visual identification, and particularly where that is the only . .
CitedPipersburgh and Another v The Queen PC 21-Feb-2008
(Belize) The board considered the unsatisfactory nature of a dock identification. No identification parade had been held because the suspects’ pictures had been published in the press and it was feared that they would be identified from these.
CitedAurelio Pop v The Queen PC 22-May-2003
PC (Belize) A witness identified the accused only making the link between the man he knew as R and the accused as the result of an improper leading question by prosecuting counsel. There had been no . .
CitedGoldson and McGlashan v The Queen PC 23-Mar-2000
PC (Jamaica) The holding of an identification parade was desirable where the witness’s claim to have known and recognised the suspect is disputed. Lord Hoffmann referring to the defendant’s denial that he was the . .
CitedRegina v Popat CACD 23-Mar-1998
Though an identification parade should be held whenever it would serve a useful purpose, where the evidence of identification by a witness was already complete and satisfactory there was no continuing obligation on the police to provide an . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.320878

Wyman, Regina (on the Application of) v The Chief Constable of Hampshire Constaulary: Admn 24 Jul 2006

The claimant challenged a formal caution administered against him for an alleged sexual assault. He denied that he had made any clear admission of the offence.
Held: The requirement under the procedure was for a clear admission of guilt, but that admission could be taken from answers given in interview. Even so, here, there was no sufficient admission. The caution was quashed.

Silber J
[2006] EWHC 1904 (Admin)
Bailii
Sexual Offences Act 2003 3 76 78
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRegina v Commissioner of Metropolitan Police ex parte Thompson Admn 18-Dec-1996
When considering an application for judicial review, where a defendant had been cautioned by the police, it was necessary to recognise that the caution procedure did have legal consequences. Though ‘There is no statutory basis for the formal . .
CitedRegina v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis, Ex parte P QBD 1995
A court may set aside a police caution where the defendant had not made a clear admission of guilt. Simon Brown LJ: ‘It follows, in my judgment, that there was here no clear and reliable admission of guilt at any stage. I am invited to look at the . .
CitedR, Regina (on the Application of) v Durham Constabulary and Another HL 17-Mar-2005
The appellant, a boy aged 15, had been warned as to admitted indecent assaults on girls. He complained that it had not been explained to him that the result would be that his name would be placed on the sex offenders register. The Chief Constable . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Police

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.243385

Silverman, Regina v: CACD 31 Mar 1987

The defendant appealed against his conviction for offences of for dishonesty. He was said ti have grossly overcharged two spinster sisters for work on their home. He said that the judge had failed properly to put his defence before the jury.
Held: There is an obligation on a judge to identify for the jury what the nature of the defence is, and to provide such assistance as is appropriate in the circumstances of the case. The judge had failed o do so in this case, and the court could not be sure that the conviction was safe. The conviction was quashed.

Watkins LJ, Bush, Kennedy JJ
[1987] EWCA Crim 3, (1988) 86 Cr App R 213
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedDirector of Public Prosecutions v Ray HL 25-Jul-1973
The defendant ordered a meal at a restaurant believing his companion would lend him the money to pay. He later decided to seek to avoid payment and took a opportunity to escape.
Held: The appeal was allowed and the conviction restored. The . .
CitedRegina v Hammond 1986
Boreham J said: ‘There is clear authority for a proposition, which is contrary to the decision of the learned judge in this case, that where a defendant in the course of interview, whether by oral reply or by statement in writing, makes excuses for . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.247959

C (A Minor) v Director of Public Prosecutions: HL 17 Mar 1995

The House considered whether the long established rule of the criminal law presuming that a child did not have a guilty mind should be set aside.
Held: Doli incapax, the presumption of a child’s lack of mens rea, is still effective and good law, but a child is not capable at law without the requisite knowledge. Judicial review was sought of the Director’s decision not to prosecute, but it was not suggested that the court’s jurisdiction to grant relief was ousted by section 29(3). Lord Lowry said that the presumption as too firmly embedded in the law of England to be removed by the judiciary: ‘Of course, no one could possibly contend (nor did Mr. Henriques try to do so) that this proposal represents what has always been the common law; it would be a change or a ‘development.’ It is quite clear that, as the law stands, the Crown must, as part of the prosecution’s case, show that a child defendant is doli capax before that child can have a case to meet. To call the proposed innovation a merely procedural change greatly understates, in my view, its radical nature, which would not be disguised by continuing to impose the persuasive burden of proof upon the prosecution. The change would not merely alter the trial procedure but would in effect get rid of the presumption of doli incapax which must now be rebutted before a child defendant can be called for his defence and the existence of which will in practice often prevent a charge from even being brought. This reflection must be enough to discourage any thought of ‘judicial legislation’ on the lines proposed.’
Only in highly exceptional cases will the court disturb the decisions of an independent prosecutor and investigator.
Lord Jauncey discussed the position in Scotland: ‘No such presumption operates in Scotland where normal criminal responsibility attaches to a child over 8 and I do not understand that injustice is considered to have resulted from this situation.’
Lord Lowry said: ‘Mr Henriques QC, presenting the respondent’s case, frankly conceded that the Divisional Court was bound by authority to recognise and apply the presumption, but he submitted that the presumption was illogical in conception and bizarre in its effect. His written case submissions based on the current educational standards of children and on the ever earlier onset of their physical and psychological maturity, as witness by the recent statutory abolition of the irrebuttable common law presumption that boys under 14 are incapable of offences involving sexual intercourse on their own part (Sexual Offences Act 1993). The written case also listed examples of legislative and judicial changes of attitude towards young children called as witnesses. Against this background counsel submitted, not that the presumption should be swept away but (echoing the 1954 proposal of Professor Glanville Williams) that in recognition of its frailties your lordships should by judicial intervention effect a change by laying it down that the prosecution’s initial burden of showing a prima facie case against a child should be the same as if the accused were an adult but that the child should then be able by evidence to raise as a defence the issue that he was doli incapax; it would then be for the prosecution to prove to the criminal standard that the child was doli capax. That your Lordships in a judicial capacity could make this change which counsel categorised as merely procedural, was an express and necessary part of his argument.

Of course no one could possibly contend (nor did Mr Henriques try to do so) that this proposal represents what has always been the common law; it would be a change or ‘development’. It is quite clear that as the law stands, the Crown must, as part of the prosecution’s case show that a child defendant is doli capax before that child can have a case to meet. To call the proposed innovation a merely procedural change greatly understates, in my view, its radical nature, which would not be disguised by continuing to impose the persuasive burden of proof upon the prosecution. The change would not merely alter the trial procedure but would in effect get rid of the presumption of doli incapax which must now be rebutted before a child defendant can be called for his defence and the existence of which will in practice often prevent a charge from even being brought. This reflection must be enough to discourage any thoughts of ‘judicial legislation’ on the lines proposed. ‘

and ‘One solution which has been suggested is to abolish the presumption with or without an increase in the minimum age of criminal responsibility. This, as Mr Robertson pointed out, could expose children to the full criminal process at an earlier age than most countries of Western Europe.’

Lord Lowry, Lord Jauncey
Times 17-Mar-1995, Independent 21-Mar-1995, (1995) Cr App R 136, [1995] UKHL 15, [1996] AC 1, [1995] RTR 261, [1995] 2 All ER 43, [1995] 2 WLR 383, (1995) 159 JP 269, [1995] 1 FLR 933, [1995] Fam Law 400, [1995] Crim LR 801
Bailii
Supreme Courts Act 1981 29(3), Prosecution of Offenders Act 1985 10
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromC (A Minor) v Director of Public Prosecutions QBD 30-Mar-1994
The 12 year old defendant held the handlebars of a motorcycle allowing a second boy to try to remove the chain and padlock securing it. He appealed against his conviction.
Held: The presumption of doli incapax for a 10-14 year old child is no . .

Cited by:
CitedRegina (Pretty) v Director of Public Prosecutions, and Another, Medical Ethics Alliance and Others, interveners Admn 18-Oct-2001
The function of the Director’s office is statutory, and his powers are those laid down. He is not able to excuse possible criminal conduct in advance, and nor could he establish a policy of not applying certain statutory provisions. The Suicide Act . .
CitedLewin v Crown Prosecution Service Admn 24-May-2002
The applicant sought review of the decision of the respondent not to initiate a prosecution in respect of a death in Spain. The deceased had been left drunk and unconscious in a car in the sun. There was a variance of opinion as to the exact cause . .
CitedRegina v Department of Education and Employment ex parte Begbie CA 20-Aug-1999
A statement made by a politician as to his intentions on a particular matter if elected could not create a legitimate expectation as regards the delivery of the promise after elected, even where the promise would directly affect individuals, and the . .
CitedDirector of Public Prosecutions v Jones and Lloyd HL 4-Mar-1999
21 people protested peacefully on the verge of the A344, next to the perimeter fence at Stonehenge. Some carried banners saying ‘Never Again,’ ‘Stonehenge Campaign 10 years of Criminal Injustice’ and ‘Free Stonehenge.’ The officer in charge . .
CitedRegina v Director of Public Prosecutions ex parte Treadaway Admn 31-Jul-1997
The applicant had been convicted of a robbery and served a long prison sentence. After release he was awarded damages against some of the policie officers for assault. The DPP decided not to proceed against the officers by way of criminal . .
CitedCorner House Research and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v The Serious Fraud Office HL 30-Jul-2008
SFO Director’s decisions reviewable
The director succeeded on his appeal against an order declaring unlawful his decision to discontinue investigations into allegations of bribery. The Attorney-General had supervisory duties as to the exercise of the duties by the Director. It had . .
CitedJTB, Regina v HL 29-Apr-2009
The defendant appealed against his convictions for sexual assaults. He was aged twelve at the time of the offences, but had been prevented from arguing that he had not known that what he was doing was wrong. The House was asked whether the effect of . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Children, Constitutional

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.78793

Stratton, Regina (on The Application of) v Thames Valley Police: Admn 7 Jun 2013

The claimant requested the court to set aside a caution accepted by her, when she said that she had not understood the serious consequences and had not admitted the offence.
Held: It was for each Chief Constable to draft his own policy, but taking proper account of Hoe Office and other guidance. Nevertheless, the paperwork was deficient in failing to explain the consequences of accepting the caution. This was particularly so where the suspect worked in an occupatione where she would require a clear CRB check to work. The caution was quashed.

Sir John Thomas P, Cranston J
[2013] EWHC 1561 (Admin)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRegina v Chief Constable of Kent ex parte L 1991
The discretion which is vested in the Crown Prosecution Service to continue criminal proceedings commenced by the police is subject to judicial review by the High Court, but only where it can be shown that the decision was made regardless of, or . .
CitedRegina v Commissioner of Metropolitan Police ex parte Thompson Admn 18-Dec-1996
When considering an application for judicial review, where a defendant had been cautioned by the police, it was necessary to recognise that the caution procedure did have legal consequences. Though ‘There is no statutory basis for the formal . .
CitedRegina v Chief Constable of North Wales Police and Others Ex Parte Thorpe and Another; Regina v Chief Constable for North Wales Police Area and others ex parte AB and CB CA 18-Mar-1998
Public Identification of Pedophiles by Police
AB and CB had been released from prison after serving sentences for sexual assaults on children. They were thought still to be dangerous. They moved about the country to escape identification, and came to be staying on a campsite. The police sought . .
CitedR, Regina (on the Application of) v Durham Constabulary and Another HL 17-Mar-2005
The appellant, a boy aged 15, had been warned as to admitted indecent assaults on girls. He complained that it had not been explained to him that the result would be that his name would be placed on the sex offenders register. The Chief Constable . .
CitedCaetano v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis Admn 28-Feb-2013
The claimant now challenged the giving of a simple caution for an alleged assault on her partner.
Held: The evidential basis of the offer of the caution was unsatisfactory, but she had accepted it on legal advice. The case involved allegations . .
CitedBlackburn v Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis CA 1968
By common law police officers owe to the general public a duty to enforce the criminal law. However, police are servants of no one but the law itself, and a chief officer of police has a wide discretion as to the manner in which the duty is . .
CitedL, Regina (On the Application of) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis SC 29-Oct-2009
Rebalancing of Enhanced Disclosure Requirements
The Court was asked as to the practice of supplying enhanced criminal record certificates under the 1997 Act. It was said that the release of reports of suspicions was a disproportionate interference in the claimants article 8 rights to a private . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Police

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.510199

Regina v Director of Public Prosecutions, ex parte Kebilene and others: HL 28 Oct 1999

(Orse Kebeline) The DPP’s appeal succeeded. A decision by the DPP to authorise a prosecution could not be judicially reviewed unless dishonesty, bad faith, or some other exceptional circumstance could be shown. A suggestion that the offence for which a prosecution was authorised was framed so as to breach the accused’s human rights was to be pursued at trial, and not by this form of challenge. The degree of deference to, and/or of recognition of the special competence of, the decision-maker is less and, correspondingly, the intensity of the Court’s review is greater – perhaps greatest in an Article 2 case – than for those human rights where the Convention requires a balance to be struck. In considering where the balance lies it may be useful to consider the following questions: (1) what does the prosecution have to prove in order to transfer the onus to the defence? (2) what is the burden on the accused – does it relate to something which is likely to be difficult for him to prove, or does it relate to something which is likely to be within his knowledge or (I would add) to which he readily has access (3) what is the nature of the threat faced by society which the provision is designed to combat?

Lord Hope, Lord Bingham of Cornhill
Times 02-Nov-1999, Gazette 10-Nov-1999, [1999] UKHL 43, [2000] 2 AC 326, [1999] 3 WLR 972, [2000] Crim LR 486, [1999] 4 All ER 801, [2000] 1 Cr App Rep 275, (1999) 11 Admin LR 1026, (2000) 2 LGLR 697, [2000] HRLR 93, [2000] UKHRR 176
House of Lords, House of Lords, Bailii
Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act 1989 19(1)(aa), European Convention on Human Rights 2, Human Rights Act 1998
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromRegina v Director of Public Prosecutions ex parte Kebilene etc Admn 30-Mar-1999
The applicants sought, by means of the Human Rights Act to challenge the way in which the decision had been made that they should be prosecuted under the 1989 Act, arguing that section 6(2) was inconsistent with the new Act.
Held: The Act . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State For The Home Department, Ex Parte Launder HL 13-Mar-1997
The question arose as to whether or not the decision of the Secretary of State to extradite the applicant to Hong Kong would have amounted to a breach of the European Convention on Human Rights. Although the Convention was not at that time in force . .
CitedIn re Smalley HL 1985
Challenge by a surety to an estreatment of his recognizance was not a matter relating to a trial on indictment for the purpose of section 29(3) because it did not affect the conduct of the trial. A sensible legislative purpose can be seen for . .
CitedRegina v Manchester Crown Court and Ashton and Others, ex parte Director of Public Prosecutions HL 7-May-1993
A Crown Court decision to stay an indictment for lack of jurisdiction, was not susceptible to Judicial Review. This was a ‘decision affecting conduct of trial’. The House considered the meaning of the phrase ‘other than its jurisdiction in matters . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State For The Home Department, Ex Parte Launder HL 13-Mar-1997
The question arose as to whether or not the decision of the Secretary of State to extradite the applicant to Hong Kong would have amounted to a breach of the European Convention on Human Rights. Although the Convention was not at that time in force . .

Cited by:
CitedParker v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 7-Dec-2000
The irrebuttable presumption contained in the Act that the level of alcohol contained in the accused’s blood at the time when he was stopped was no less than the level measured later that the police station, was not incompatible with the defendant’s . .
CitedRegina v Clive Louden Carass CACD 19-Dec-2001
When a defendant was accused of an offence under the section, and wished to raise a defence under sub-section 4, the duty of proof placed on him by the sub-section amounted to a duty to bring sufficient evidence to raise the defence, and the section . .
CitedDavies v Health and Safety Executive CA 18-Dec-2002
The defendant complained that section 40 imposed a burden of proof upon him which infringed the presumption of innocence and his right to a fair trial. The trial judge held that the burden imposed a legal burden rather than an evidential one.
CitedRegina v Johnstone HL 22-May-2003
The defendant was convicted under the 1994 Act of producing counterfeit CDs. He argued that the affixing of the name of the artist to the CD was not a trade mark use, and that the prosecution had first to establish a civil offence before his act . .
CitedBloggs 61, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 18-Jun-2003
The applicant sought review of a decision to remove him from a witness protection scheme within the prison. He claimed that having been promised protection, he had a legitimate expectation of protection, having been told he would receive protection . .
CitedRegina v Her Majesty’s Attorney General ex parte Rusbridger and Another HL 26-Jun-2003
Limit to Declaratory Refilef as to Future Acts
The applicant newspaper editor wanted to campaign for a republican government. Articles were published, and he sought confirmation that he would not be prosecuted under the Act, in the light of the 1998 Act.
Held: Declaratory relief as to the . .
CitedNorwood v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 3-Jul-2003
The appellant a BNP member had displayed a large poster in his bedroom window saying ‘Islam out of Britain’. He was convicted of an aggravated attempt to cause alarm or distress. The offence was established on proof of several matters, unless the . .
CitedCarson and Reynolds v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 17-Jun-2003
The claimant Reynolds challenged the differential treatment by age of jobseeker’s allowance. Carson complained that as a foreign resident pensioner, her benefits had not been uprated. The questions in each case were whether the benefit affected a . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Turgut CA 28-Jan-2000
When the Court of Appeal was asked to look at the decision of the Home Secretary on an appeal to him for asylum, the court should investigate the factual circumstances which lay behind the decision. The court must follow the practice of the European . .
CitedLynch v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 8-Nov-2001
The defendant challenged a conviction for having a locked bladed article in his possession in a public place, on the basis that it placed on him a burden of proof contrary to the convention.
Held: Salabiaku permits a reverse onus but requires . .
CitedSamaroo and Sezek v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 17-Jul-2001
Two foreign nationals with leave to remain in this country committed serious crimes. The Secretary of State ordered their deportation.
Held: Where the deportation of a foreigner following a conviction here, would conflict with his human . .
CitedRegina v Lambert HL 5-Jul-2001
Restraint on Interference with Burden of Proof
The defendant had been convicted for possessing drugs found on him in a bag when he was arrested. He denied knowing of them. He was convicted having failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that he had not known of the drugs. The case was . .
CitedRegina (on the Application of Gjovalin Pepushi) v Crown Prosecution Service Admn 11-May-2004
The claimant was stopped when boarding a flight to Canada, having previously stopped in France and Italy. He bore a false Swedish passport, and intended to claim asylum in Canada. He now claimed the benefit of the article 31 (per Adimi), to defend a . .
CitedGhaidan v Godin-Mendoza HL 21-Jun-2004
Same Sex Partner Entitled to tenancy Succession
The protected tenant had died. His same-sex partner sought a statutory inheritance of the tenancy.
Held: His appeal succeeded. The Fitzpatrick case referred to the position before the 1998 Act: ‘Discriminatory law undermines the rule of law . .
CitedEvans v Amicus Healthcare Ltd and others CA 25-Jun-2004
The applicant challenged the decision of the court that the sperm donor who had fertilised her eggs to create embryos stored by the respondent IVF clinic, could withdraw his consent to their continued storage or use.
Held: The judge worked . .
CitedRegina v Carroll and Al-Hasan and Secretary of State for Home Department Admn 16-Feb-2001
The claimants challenged the instruction that they must squat whilst undergoing a strip search in prison. A dog search had given cause to supect the presence of explosives in the wing, and the officers understood that such explosives might be hidden . .
CitedSheldrake v Director of Public Prosecutions; Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002 HL 14-Oct-2004
Appeals were brought complaining as to the apparent reversal of the burden of proof in road traffic cases and in cases under the Terrorism Acts. Was a legal or an evidential burden placed on a defendant?
Held: Lord Bingham of Cornhill said: . .
CitedAl-Fayed and others v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis and others CA 25-Nov-2004
The appellants appealed from dismissal of their claims for wrongful imprisonment by the respondent. Each had attended at a police station for interview on allegations of theft. They had been arrested and held pending interview and then released. Mr . .
CitedA v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 16-Dec-2004
The applicants had been imprisoned and held without trial, being suspected of international terrorism. No criminal charges were intended to be brought. They were foreigners and free to return home if they wished, but feared for their lives if they . .
CitedA, Re Application for Judicial Review QBNI 25-Jun-2001
The applicant, who feared for his life if identified, sought the release to him of materials discovered by the police in searching premises associated with a loyalist paramiliitary group. He thought that they might include information sourced form . .
CitedPrice and others v Leeds City Council CA 16-Mar-2005
The defendant gypsies had moved their caravans onto land belonging to the respondents without planning permission. They appealed an order to leave saying that the order infringed their rights to respect for family life.
Held: There had been . .
CitedCarson, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions; Reynolds v Same HL 26-May-2005
One claimant said that as a foreign resident pensioner, she had been excluded from the annual uprating of state retirement pension, and that this was an infringement of her human rights. Another complained at the lower levels of job-seeker’s . .
CitedAxon, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health and Another Admn 23-Jan-2006
A mother sought to challenge guidelines issued by the respondent which would allow doctors to protect the confidentiality of women under 16 who came to them for assistance even though the sexual activities they might engage in would be unlawful.
CitedBegum (otherwise SB), Regina (on the Application of) v Denbigh High School HL 22-Mar-2006
The student, a Muslim wished to wear a full Islamic dress, the jilbab, but this was not consistent with the school’s uniform policy. She complained that this interfered with her right to express her religion.
Held: The school’s appeal . .
CitedBermingham and others v The Director of the Serious Fraud Office QBD 21-Feb-2006
Prosecution to protect defendant not available
The claimants faced extradition to the US. They said that the respondent had infringed their human rights by deciding not to prosecute them in the UK. There was no mutuality in the Act under which they were to be extradited.
Held: The Director . .
CitedRegina v Hertfordshire County Council, ex parte Green Environmental Industries Ltd and Another HL 17-Feb-2000
A notice was given to the holder of a waste disposal licence to require certain information to be provided on pain of prosecution. The provision of such information could also then be evidence against the provider of the commission of a criminal . .
CitedOfulue and Another v Bossert CA 29-Jan-2008
The claimants appealed an order finding that the defendant had acquired their land by adverse possession. They said that the defendant had asserted in defence to possession proceedings that they were tenants, and that this contradicted an intent to . .
CitedIn re P and Others, (Adoption: Unmarried couple) (Northern Ireland); In re G HL 18-Jun-2008
The applicants complained that as an unmarried couple they had been excluded from consideration as adopters.
Held: Northern Ireland legislation had not moved in the same way as it had for other jurisdictions within the UK. The greater . .
CitedCorner House Research and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v The Serious Fraud Office HL 30-Jul-2008
SFO Director’s decisions reviewable
The director succeeded on his appeal against an order declaring unlawful his decision to discontinue investigations into allegations of bribery. The Attorney-General had supervisory duties as to the exercise of the duties by the Director. It had . .
CitedRegina v G; Regina v J HL 4-Mar-2009
G was to stand trial for possession of articles useful for terrorism. Whilst in prison, he collected and created diagrams and information and prepared plans to bomb a local army centre. When arrested he said he had done so to upset the prison . .
CitedE and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 10-Jun-2011
Judicial review was sought of a decision by the respondent to prosecute a child for her alleged sexual abuse of her younger sisters. Agencies other than the police and CPS considered that a prosecution would harm both the applicant and her sisters. . .
CitedAXA General Insurance Ltd and Others v Lord Advocate and Others SC 12-Oct-2011
Standing to Claim under A1P1 ECHR
The appellants had written employers’ liability insurance policies. They appealed against rejection of their challenge to the 2009 Act which provided that asymptomatic pleural plaques, pleural thickening and asbestosis should constitute actionable . .
CitedBritish Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Ahmad Admn 11-Jan-2012
The BBC wished to interview the prisoner who had been detained pending extradition to the US since 2004, and now challenged decision to refuse the interview.
Held: The claim succeeded. The decision was quashed and must be retaken. If ever any . .
CitedSG and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions SC 18-Mar-2015
The court was asked whether it was lawful for the Secretary of State to make subordinate legislation imposing a cap on the amount of welfare benefits which can be received by claimants in non-working households, equivalent to the net median earnings . .
CitedSteinfeld and Another v Secretary of State for Education CA 21-Feb-2017
Hetero Partnerships – wait and see proportionate
The claimants, a heterosexual couple complained that their inability to have a civil partnership was an unlawful discrimination against them and a denial of their Article 8 rights. The argument that the appellants’ case did not come within the ambit . .
CitedRegina v Kansal (2) HL 29-Nov-2001
The prosecutor had lead and relied at trial on evidence obtained by compulsory questioning under the 1986 Act.
Held: In doing so the prosecutor was acting to give effect to section 433.
The decision in Lambert to disallow retrospective . .
CitedHuman Rights Commission for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland : Abortion) SC 7-Jun-2018
The Commission challenged the compatibility of the NI law relating to banning nearly all abortions with Human Rights Law. It now challenged a decision that it did not have standing to bring the case.
Held: (Lady Hale, Lord Kerr and Lord Wilson . .
CitedBelhaj and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another SC 4-Jul-2018
Challenge to decision not to prosecute senior Intelligence Service officials for alleged offences in connection with his unlawful rendition and mistreatment in Libya. The issue here was whether on the hearing of the application for judicial review, . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Judicial Review, Human Rights

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.159025

Kay and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Leeds Magistrates’ Court and Another: Admn 23 May 2018

Full Duty of Disclosure on Private Prosecutor

The claimant challenged the issue of a summons by the magistrate on the complaint of a private prosecutor.
Held: The challenge succeeded. A private prosecutor and his lawyers had a duty of candour and of full disclosure. The prosecutor having failed in this, and the magistrate having failed in his own duty to address such a failure, the summons was quashed.
As to the threshold test for the issuance of a summons: ‘(1) The magistrate must ascertain whether the allegation is an offence known to the law, and if so whether the essential ingredients of the offence are prima facie present; that the offence alleged is not time-barred; that the court has jurisdiction; and whether the informant has the necessary authority to prosecute.
(2) If so, generally the magistrate ought to issue the summons, unless there are compelling reasons not to do so – most obviously that the application is vexatious (which may involve the presence of an improper ulterior purpose and/or long delay); or is an abuse of process; or is otherwise improper. . . (4) Whether the applicant has previously approached the police may be a relevant circumstance.’

Gross LJ, Sweeney J
[2018] EWHC 1233 (Admin), [2018] WLR(D) 319, [2018] 2 Cr App R 27, [2018] 4 WLR 91, [2018] Crim LR 855, [2018] LLR 560
Bailii, WLRD
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRegina (DPP) v Sunderland MC Admn k 2014
When determining an application for a summons a magistrate must ascertain whether the allegation is of an offence known to law, and if so whether the essential ingredients of the offence are prima facie present
The court observed: ‘[The . .

Cited by:
CitedJohnson v Westminster Magistrates’ Court Admn 3-Jul-2019
Public Office Misconduct – Acting As not While
The claimant sought judicial review of a decision to issue a summons against him alleging three offences of misconduct in public office. He was said to have issue misleading statements in support of the campaign leading up to the Referendum on . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Magistrates

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.618111

Hughes v Regina: CACD 14 May 2009

The defendant sought leave to appeal against his sentence. The Attorney-General had already referred the sentence to the Court of Appeal which had increased the term applicable. He now sought to bring in fresh medical evidence suggesting that he should instead be subject to a hospital order.
Held: The defendant had a right to appeal, and had not previously exercised that right. His right remained. The court had jurisdiction to hear his application for leave to appeal.

Lord Justice Hughes, Mr Justice King and Judge Radford
[2009] EWCA Crim 841
Bailii, Times
Criminal Justice Act 1988 36
England and Wales

Criminal Practice

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.343901

Regina v James Hanratty (Deceased): CACD 10 May 2002

Posthumous Appeal – Clear Purpose and Care Needed

An appeal was presented against the conviction for a murder many years earlier. The prosecution sought to introduce DNA evidence to support its case. The appellant party objected.
Held: The purpose of the appeal was to achieve justice, and fresh evidence could be presented by the prosecution, and admitted by the court to achieve that purpose. Though the trial could certainly be criticised by current standards, it had not been at such a level as to make it fundamentally unfair. The court should be careful in expending so much time and money on very old cases.

Mr Justice Leveson
Times 16-May-2002, Gazette 13-Jun-2002, [2002] EWCA Crim 1141, [2002] 2 Cr App R 30, [2002] 3 All ER 534
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRegina 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: . .
See AlsoRegina v Hanratty CACD 26-Oct-2000
Persuasive but not conclusive evidence of the deceased’s involvement in a notorious murder for which he had hanged had been found by subsequent DNA analysis. That analysis could only be improved by direct DNA analysis to be obtained by exhuming his . .

Cited by:
CitedBeckles, Regina v CACD 12-Nov-2004
The appellant had been convicted in 1997 of robbery and false imprisonment. His case was now refererred by the Criminal Cases Review Commission. The defendant had, on advice from his solicitor refused to answer questions at the police station. The . .
See AlsoRegina v Hanratty CACD 26-Oct-2000
Persuasive but not conclusive evidence of the deceased’s involvement in a notorious murder for which he had hanged had been found by subsequent DNA analysis. That analysis could only be improved by direct DNA analysis to be obtained by exhuming his . .
CitedKelvin Dial (otherwise called Peter), Andrew Dottin (otherwise called Maxwell) v The State PC 14-Feb-2005
(Trinidad and Tobago) Two defendants appealed against their convictions for murder. The principal witness who had identified them, had retracted his evidence, but the retraction had not been believed. He was then shown to have lied.
Held: The . .
CitedNoye, Kenneth, Regina v CACD 22-Mar-2011
The prisoner appealed against his conviction for murder on reference from the CCRC. There were new doubts about the reliabiity of the expert forensic expert.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. Dr H’s evidence did not impinge on the essential . .
CitedAdams, 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.

Criminal Practice, Evidence

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.170300

Pipe, Regina v: CACD 18 Nov 2014

The defendant appealed against conviction and sentence for sexual assaults on a 15 year old girl. The complainaint had become so upset that the judge had disallowed continued cross-examination. The defence was as to her credibility.
Held: The appeal failed. By the time the cross examination was halted, the defence team had asked the bulk of its questions, and those which went most directly to the issues; ‘the appellant’s principal defence, to the effect that the allegations against him were fabricated, was fully put to, and explored with, the complainant.’ and ‘ the subsidiary issue (the alleged fragile state of the complainant’s mental health) had also been explored with the complainant in her cross-examination. Aspects of her illness had been pursued with her, including the fact that she suffered from a psychotic illness in 2012, during which she believed that someone was going to kill her. Again, therefore, it could not be said that the premature cessation of her cross-examination prevented the jury from having a clear understanding of that issue.’, and ‘while the complainant’s evidence was obviously very important in this case, it was far from being the only evidence against the appellant. We have already referred to the evidence from Z, the appellant’s alleged admission to Lucy (his then wife), his own admission in evidence as to kissing and cuddling the complainant, and the text messages. ‘

Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd LCJ, Coulson, Globe JJ
[2014] EWCA Crim 2570
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRegina v Stretton and McCallion CACD 1988
The complainant had been cross-examined for some time but became ill and was incapable of continuing to give evidence. The trial judge allowed the trial to continue, but gave the jury a clear warning as to how they should approach their task. The . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.540492

Twomey, Cameron and Guthrie v The United Kingdom (Legal Summary): ECHR 28 May 2013

ECHR Criminal proceedings
Article 6-1
Fair hearing
Equality of arms
Independent tribunal
Trial by judge sitting alone owing to risk of jury tampering: inadmissible
Facts – The case concerned the power under section 46 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 for a judge in a trial on indictment to discharge the jury where jury tampering appears to have taken place. The provision also enables the judge to continue the trial alone if satisfied that tampering has in fact taken place and that continuing without a jury would be fair to the defendant.
The first and second applicants were convicted of robbery related charges by a judge sitting alone after the jury had been discharged by the original trial judge on the grounds that a ‘serious attempt at jury tampering’ had taken place during the trial. The material on which the original trial judge relied in reaching that finding was not disclosed to the defence, but defence counsel were able to make representations on the proposal to discharge. The Court of Appeal subsequently ordered that the retrial should be conducted by a judge sitting alone without a jury in view of the very significant danger of jury tampering.
In unrelated proceedings, the third applicant was convicted of fraud with three co-defendants after the trial judge had discharged the jury following allegations of tampering and had decided to try the case alone. The material on which the allegations were made was not disclosed to the defence, but the defence received a gist statement outlining the nature of the allegations and were also given leave to lodge an interlocutory appeal against the judge’s decision. At the interlocutory appeal, the Court of Appeal upheld the trial judge’s ruling, observing that nothing considered by her under public-interest immunity principles should have been disclosed to the defence; that the gist statement accurately summarised the effect of the undisclosed material; and that there was nothing in the material to suggest that the trial judge should have disqualified herself from continuing with the trial.
In their applications to the European Court, all the applicants complained that the decision to proceed without a jury had been made on the basis of material which was not disclosed to them. The second applicant also complained, inter alia, of the risk of bias inherent in the decision of the trial judge in her case to continue without a jury after seeing the undisclosed evidence of jury tampering.
Law – Article 6-1: As regards the applicants’ complaint that the decision to proceed without a jury had been made on the basis of material which was not disclosed to them, it was important to note that the undisclosed material did not concern the applicants’ guilt or innocence, but the separate issue of whether there had been an attempt to contact members of the jury. The material had been relied on by the prosecution solely in relation to the procedural question whether the jury should be discharged and whether the trial should proceed before a judge sitting alone. When deciding whether adequate safeguards had been provided to the defence, the fact that what was at stake was the mode of trial rather than conviction or acquittal had to weigh heavily in the balance. In both cases, the defence had been given the opportunity to make representations as to whether or not the jury should be discharged and to make full submissions on the fairness of continuing without a jury. In the Court’s view, the procedure followed had afforded the defence sufficient safeguards, taking into account, on the one hand, the important public-interest grounds against disclosing the relevant evidence to the defence and, on the other, the fact that all that was to be determined was whether the trial should continue before a judge sitting alone or a judge sitting with a jury, two forms of trial which in principle were equally acceptable under Article 6. While the circumstances in which evidence relating to jury tampering could be withheld from the defence were not set out in the legislation, this had not caused unfairness to the defence since the categories of material covered by public-interest immunity were well established in common law.
The Court did not accept the third applicant’s argument that there was a risk of bias inherent in the trial judge’s decision to continue alone in her case. The trial judge had not seen any undisclosed material that was related to one of the elements of the offences charged and, as an experienced criminal judge, perfectly understood that a conviction could be entered only where the prosecution evidence met the standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt. The legislative provisions in question served the interests of justice, in that individuals accused of criminal offences should not be permitted to escape justice through any attempt to interfere with the jury. Whether, after discharge of the jury, the trial proceeded before the original judge or recommenced before a new judge, as had occurred in the case of the first and second applicants, that judge would know that there had been strong evidence of jury tampering at an earlier stage. Any prejudice thereby caused to the defence in either of the present applications was, in the Court’s view, negligible and, moreover, justified by the public interest at stake.
Conclusion: inadmissible (manifestly ill-founded).

67318/09 22226/12 – Legal Summary, [2013] ECHR 577
Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights, Criminal Justice Act 2003 46
Human Rights
Citing:
Principal judgmentTwomey, Cameron And Guthrie v The United Kingdom (Judgment) ECHR 28-May-2013
. .

Cited by:
Legal SummaryTwomey, Cameron And Guthrie v The United Kingdom (Judgment) ECHR 28-May-2013
. .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Criminal Practice

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.511078

Barnes (As Former Court Appointed Receiver) v The Eastenders Group and Another: SC 8 May 2014

Costs of Wrongly Appointed Receiver

‘The contest in this case is about who should bear the costs and expenses of a receiver appointed under an order which ought not to have been made. The appellant, who is a former partner in a well known firm of accountants, was appointed to act as management receiver of the assets of a group of companies referred to as Eastenders on the application of CPS. The order was made under section 48 of the 2002 Act but was quashed on appeal.’
Held: The Receiver’s appeal against the refusal of the court to order payment by CPS succeeded.
At common law, a receiver was entitled to his costs from the estate under receivership, howver the issue here was as to whether the order was proportionate in this case under A1P1. The taking of property without compensation is, in general, a disproportionate interference with A1. In this case the company was not a defendant, and nor were the assets those of the defendant.
The Receiver having acted under appointent of and by agreement with the CPS, they were responsible.

Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Kerr, Lord Wilson, Lord Hughes, Lord Toulson
[2014] UKSC 26, [2014] WLR(D) 194, [2014] 2 WLR 1269, UKSC 2013/0006
Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD, SC Summary, SC
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, European Convention on Human Rights P1 A1
England and Wales
Citing:
See AlsoEastenders Cash and Carry Plc and Another v Revenue and Customs Admn 4-Nov-2010
Applications for judicial review in relation to alcoholic goods detained by the Defendants on grounds of a suspicion that duty may not have been paid in respect of them.
Sales J said: ‘In my view, there is a clear reason why Parliament wished . .
See AlsoEastenders Cash and Carry Plc v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 29-Dec-2010
FTTTx Excise Duty – warehouse – application for registration as an owner of goods under Warehousekeepers and Owners of Goods Regulations 1999 (‘WOWGR’) – whether decision of HMRC could reasonably have been . .
See AlsoEastenders Cash and Carry Plc v South Western Magistrates’ Court Admn 22-Mar-2011
The claimant sought judicial review of decisions by the magistrates first to issue search warrants, and then to refuse to disclose the information on which it had been based.
Held: The documentation now having been disclosed the second part of . .
See AlsoEastenders Cash and Carry Plc and Others v HM Revenue and Customs CA 20-Jan-2012
The Court considered the lawfulness of the exercise of the power claimed by the Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Customs and Excise (HMRC) to detain goods temporarily for the purpose of investigating their status. . .
See alsoFirst Stop Wholesale Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs Admn 27-Mar-2012
The claimant sought judicial review of the defendant’s decisions to seize and detain alcoholic drinks from his business premises.
Held: Goods could not lawfully be detained under section 139(1) for the purpose of ascertaining whether the power . .
See AlsoEastenders Cash and Carry Plc v Revenue and Customs FTTTx 27-Mar-2012
FTTTx Procedure – costs – application for costs out of time – whether discretion to entertain an application should be exercised – Rule 5 (3) (a) Tribunal Rules 2009 – whether direction should be made to apply . .
See AlsoEastenders Cash and Carry Plc and Another v HM Revenue and Customs CA 22-May-2012
The appellants had succeeded in resisting proceedings commenced by the respondents for the seizure of goods. The respondent now argued that costs should not follow the event, asserting a statutory bar. The appellant additionally argued that any such . .
See AlsoFirst Stop Wholesale Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs Admn 16-Jul-2012
The applicant challenged the court’s refusal to pay its costs after a finding that the seizure of goods by the respondent had been unlawful. The defendant argued that section 144 of the 1979 Act protected it against such an order.
Held: . .
See AlsoFirst Stop Wholesale Ltd R (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs Admn 5-Oct-2012
Claim for judicial review of various seizure notices issued by the defendants. The question was whether a statement in the notices that ‘no evidence of UK duty payment has been provided’ was a sufficient statement of the grounds for seizing the . .
See AlsoCrown Prosecution Service v The Eastenders Group and Another CACD 23-Nov-2012
‘application by the CPS for permission to appeal against . . orders made . . in the Central Criminal Court on 8 May 2012. I use the expression ‘in form’ because as will appear there are issues as to the jurisdiction of the court. The case raises . .
CitedHM Revenue and Customs v First Stop Wholesale Ltd and Another CA 12-Mar-2013
‘Appeals . . against orders . . arising out of the detention . . by HMRC of large quantities of alcohol from the warehouse and other premises of First Stop, the respondent to the first two appeals and the appellant in the third. At the time the . .
CitedCapewell v Commissioners for HM Customs and Excise and Sinclair CA 2-Dec-2004
The court approved guidelines for the appointment and remuneration of a receiver appointed under the 1988 Act. . .
CitedCapewell v Revenue and Customs and Another HL 31-Jan-2007
The defendant appealed against an order regarding the remuneration of a receiver appointed to administer a restraint order placed on the assets of the defendant under the 1988 Act on the basis of an allegation that the defendant had been involved in . .
CitedFibrosa Spolka Akcyjna v Fairbairn Lawson Combe Barbour Ltd HL 15-Jun-1942
A contract for the supply by the respondents of special machinery to be manufactured by them was treated as an ordinary contract for the sale of goods. It began valid, but suffered frustration by the outbreak of war.
Held: Lord Wright restated . .
CitedSporrong and Lonnroth v Sweden ECHR 23-Sep-1982
Balance of Interests in peaceful enjoyment claim
(Plenary Court) The claimants challenged orders expropriating their properties for redevelopment, and the banning of construction pending redevelopment. The orders remained in place for many years.
Held: Article 1 comprises three distinct . .
CitedJames and Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 21-Feb-1986
The claimants challenged the 1967 Act, saying that it deprived them of their property rights when lessees were given the power to purchase the freehold reversion.
Held: Article 1 (P1-1) in substance guarantees the right of property. Allowing a . .
CitedRaimondo v Italy ECHR 22-Feb-1994
The applicant was arrested and placed under house arrest on charges relating to his association with the Mafia. As an interim measure some of his property was seized. The proceedings ended in his acquittal. He claimed that the seizure of his . .
CitedBenham v United Kingdom ECHR 8-Feb-1995
Legal Aid was wrongfully refused where a tax or fine defaulter was liable to imprisonment, and the lack of a proper means enquiry, made imprisonment of poll tax defaulter unlawful. A poll tax defaulter had been wrongly committed to prison by . .
CitedIn Re Andrews CA 25-Feb-1999
The defendant and his son had been charged with offences relating to their joint business, and restraint orders were made. The son was convicted, but the defendant was acquitted and awarded his costs out of central funds. The taxing officer held . .
CitedRoxborough v Rothmans of Pall Mall Australia Ltd 6-Dec-2001
High Court of Australia – Rothmans were licensed to act as wholesalers of tobacco products under a New South Wales statute. They sold products to retailers for a price including licence fees, which were in reality a form of indirect taxation, . .
CitedHughes and Another v Commissioners of Customs and Excise etc CA 20-May-2002
N was charged with VAT fraud. He was the joint owner of a company with his brother T each holding 50% of the shares. T was never charged. A restraint and receivership order was made against N, preventing the company from dealing in any way with its . .
CitedCrown Prosecution Service v Compton, Comptons of Brighton Limited, Coyne, Compton CA 27-Nov-2002
Appeal against refusal of restraint order.
Held: It is enough that on the documents a good arguable case arises for treating the relevant assets as the realisable property of the defendant.
Lord Justice Simon Brown said: ‘All that I . .
CitedFrizen v Russia ECHR 24-Mar-2005
Violation of P1-1. A confiscation order made by a Russian criminal court was unlawful and involved a violation of the applicant’s rights under A1P1. The husband was convicted of fraud. She was not herself charged with any criminal offence. After his . .
CitedStanford International Bank Ltd, Re CA 25-Feb-2010
Hughes LJ said: ‘it is essential that the duty of candour laid upon any applicant for an order without notice is fully understood and complied with. It is not limited to a duty not to misrepresent. It consists in a duty to consider what any other . .
CitedSinclair In her Capacity As the Former Receiver v Glatt Executors of Estate of Glatt and Glatt and Glatt CA 13-Mar-2009
The court considered the recovery of expenses by a receiver appointed to administer assets of money launderer. The receiver sought to exercise a lien over assets held for the prisoner by the prison to recover the costs of the receivership after the . .

Cited by:
See AlsoEastenders Cash and Carry Plc and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs SC 11-Jun-2014
Alcoholic drinks had been seized by the respondents pending further enquiries with a view to a possible forfeiture, then held and returned but only under court order. The company had complained that the detention of the goods was unlawful. The . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Customs and Excise, Costs, Human Rights, Criminal Practice

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.524663

Regina v West London Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate, ex parte Klahn: QBD 1979

The issue of a summons by a magistrate is a judicial act: ‘The duty of a magistrate in considering an application for the issue of a summons is to exercise a judicial discretion in deciding whether or not to issue a summons. It would appear that he should at the very least ascertain: (1) whether the allegation is of an offence known to the law and if so whether the essential ingredients of the offence are prima facie present; (2) that the offence alleged is not ‘out of time’; (3) that the court has jurisdiction; (4) whether the informant has the necessary authority to prosecute. In addition to these specific matters it is clear that he may and indeed should consider whether the allegation is vexatious: see Rex v Bros.
Since the matter is properly within the magistrate’s discretion it would be inappropriate to attempt to lay down an exhaustive catalogue of matters to which consideration should be given. Plainly he should consider the whole of the relevant circumstances.’ and
‘In the overwhelming majority of cases the magistrate will not need to consider material beyond that provided by the informant. In my judgment, however, he must be able to inform himself of all relevant facts. Mr Woolf, who appeared as amicus curiae, and to whom the court is indebted for his assistance, submitted that the magistrate has a residual discretion to hear a proposed defendant if he felt it necessary for the purpose of reaching a decision.We would accept this contention.
The magistrate must be able to satisfy himself that it is a proper case in which to issue a summons. There can be no question, however, of conducting a preliminary hearing. Until a summons has been issued there is no allegation to meet; no charge has been made. A proposed defendant has no locus standi and no right at this stage to be heard. Whilst it is conceivable that a magistrate might seek information from him in exceptional circumstances it must be entirely within the discretion of the magistrate whether to do so.’

Lord Widgery CJ
[1979] 1 WLR 933
England and Wales
Citing:
ApprovedRegina v Bros 1902
A magistrate should consider, before issuing a summons, whether it appears to be vexatious. . .
CitedRegina v Wilson QBD 1957
‘The principle that, once the summing up is concluded, no further evidence ought to be given, must be maintained in every case, and, if further evidence is allowed at that stage, . . the conviction will be quashed.’ The court considered the nature . .

Cited by:
CitedRegina v Newcastle Upon Tyne Magistrates’ Court ex parte Still, Lawlan, Davidson, Pryor, and Forrest Admn 18-Sep-1996
A man was accused of a series of mortgage frauds. The defendants each gave evidence to the court. He made a complaint of perjury against each of them. The current defendants sought judicial review of a refusal to discharge the summonses.
Held: . .
CitedAugusto Pinochet Ugarte and In the Matter of an Application for Leave To Move for Judicial Review Regina v Evans (Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate) Admn 28-Oct-1998
A provisional warrant had been issued by a magistrate for the arrest of the former president of Chile when visting London. The arrest had been in response to an extradition request from a judge in Spain and related to allegations of criminal acts by . .
CitedJones v Whalley HL 26-Jul-2006
The appellant had assaulted the respondent. He had accepted a caution for the offence, but the claimant had then pursued a private prosecution. He now appealed refusal of a stay, saying it was an abuse of process.
Held: The defendant’s appeal . .
CitedRegina v Belmarsh Magistrates’ Court ex parte Fiona Watts Admn 8-Feb-1999
The defendant sought to have dismissed as an abuse of proces charges against her that as an officer of Customs and Excise prosecuting the now private prosecutor, she had committed various offences.
Held: The magistrate was vested with . .
CitedCharlson, Regina (on the Application of) v Guildford Magistrates’ Court and others Admn 11-Sep-2006
The CPS had discontinued a prosecution. The magistrates were then asked to issue a summons for a private prosecution. The private prosecutor appealed against the refusal to issue the summons. A second summons was requested from a different . .
ApprovedGreen, Regina (on the Application of) v The City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court, Thoday, Thompson Admn 5-Dec-2007
The claimant appealed from the refusal by the magistrate to issue summonses for the prosecution for blashemous libel of the Director General of the BBC and the producers of a show entitled ‘Jerry Springer – The Opera.’
Held: The gist of the . .
CitedPercy, Regina (on the Application of) v Corby Magistrates’ Court Admn 7-Feb-2008
The claimant sought judicial review of a decision of the magistrates not to issue summonses against two police officers. She had been demonstrating near a US base, but had refused to intervene and allowed a US officer to unlawfully arrest and detain . .
CitedScopelight Ltd and Others v Chief of Police for Northumbria CA 5-Nov-2009
The claimant sought return of items removed by the defendants under the 1984 Act. A decision had been made against a prosecution by the police. The police wished to hold onto the items to allow a decision from the second defendant.
Held: The . .
CitedBrowning v Lewes Crown Court and RSPCA Admn 24-Apr-2012
The claimant appealed against the refusal by the respondent to state a case regarding its conviction of the claimant of offences under the 2006 Act.
Held: In view of the case of Perkins, the application failed save that the Crown Court should . .
CitedBall v Johnson 29-May-2019
Summons granted for political lies allegation
(Westminster Magistrates Court) The court gave its reasons for acceding to a request for the issue of a summons requiring the defendant to answer a charge for three offences alleging misconduct in a public office.
Held: There was prima facie . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Magistrates, Criminal Practice

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.237556

London Borough of Southwark, Regina (on The Application of) v London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority and Another: Admn 15 Jul 2016

There had been a substantial and lethal fire. The Borough challenged a decision by the defedant to retain to itself the prosecution of possible offenders, saying that the defendant might possibly be itself subject to criticism.
Held: The objection failed. ‘Any prosecution would be grounded firmly in the state of affairs that Southwark had permitted to develop at Lakanal House prior to the fire. Thus, if an allegation of breach of the RRO is to be established, it will have to be based on the extent (if at all) to which Southwark failed to comply with its statutory duty which is free standing of any failures during the fire itself.’ The provision of a course at an earlier date was no promise which could afect this matter.

Sir Brian leveson P QBD, McGowan DBE J
[2016] EWHC 1701 (Admin)
Bailii
Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005, Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, Fire Rescue and Services Act 2004
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedPorter and Weeks v Magill HL 13-Dec-2001
Councillors Liable for Unlawful Purposes Use
The defendant local councillors were accused of having sold rather than let council houses in order to encourage an electorate which would be more likely to be supportive of their political party. They had been advised that the policy would be . .
CitedHarb v HRH Prince Abdul Aziz Bin Fahd Bin Abdul Aziz CA 16-Jun-2016
The appellant challenged an order made in favour of his wife in proceedings to enforce a contract between them. He alleged that there had been no contract, and bias in the judge. The appellant had not attended to allow cross examination because as a . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Natural Justice

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.567206

Stovell, Regina v: CACD 12 Jan 2006

The defendant appealed against his conviction. Before he gave evidence, his legal team withdrew for professional embarrassment. He now complained that notwithstanding that he was unrepresented, prosecuting counsel had been permitted to make a closing address.
Held: The appeal failed. Rose LJ said: ‘So far as the prosecution’s second speech is concerned, in the light of the procedural and evidential changes which have taken place since the decision of this Court in Mondon, we are by no means satisfied that in all cases, particularly when a defendant has been represented substantially throughout the trial and there are issues arising during the defence upon which the jury would be assisted by comment from prosecuting counsel, it is necessarily inappropriate for prosecuting counsel to make a second speech. But it is unnecessary in the present case to reach a conclusion with regard to that matter, because, for the reasons which we have already given, even the old authorities would not, as it seems to us, lead to the quashing of this conviction.’

Rose VP CACD LJ, Raffery J, Sir Paul Kennedy
[2006] EWCA Crim 27
Bailii
Crime and Disorder Act 1998 31(1)(a), Criminal Justice Act 1988 131(1)
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRegina v Mondon CACD 1968
The appellant had been unrepresented throughout her trial. She appealed, complaining that the prosecutor had been allowed to make a closing speech.
Held: The conviction was quashed. Lord Justice Edmund Davies drew attention to the impact which . .

Cited by:
CitedCojan, Regina v CACD 25-Nov-2014
The defendant appealed against his convictions for offences of rape and robbery. Towards the end of his trial, he had sacked his legal team, and had given no colsing address. He complained that the judge had even so allowed the prosecutor to ake an . .
CitedRabani, Regina v CACD 21-Aug-2008
The defendant appealed against his conviction. He had not been represented at trial, and several objections were taken to the conduct of the case, and in particular that prosecuting counsel had made a closing address, and that he had not been . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.375563

Regina v Argent: CACD 16 Dec 1996

The defendant complained that, after acting on his solicitor’s advice to not answer questions when interviewed by the police, the court had allowed the jury to draw inferences from his failure. The police had failed to make such full disclosure of the case against the appellant as they could and should have done. The solicitor’s advice not to answer questions in such circumstances was in accordance with Law Society guidance.
Held: The questions of whether the accused has relied on a fact in his defence and if he has whether he failed to mention it in interview are questions of fact for the jury. The jury is concerned not with the correctness of a solicitor’s advice, but with the reasonableness of the defendant’s conduct in all the circumstances including the advice given.
Lord Bingham CJ said: ‘Subsection (2)(d) empowers a jury in prescribed circumstances to draw such inferences as appear proper. The words which we have emphasised embody a recognition of the fact that section 34 is a section which provides for an exception to the common law rule: and it is of course the case that the 1994 Act does not abolish the entitlement of a suspect to remain silent but only and in a limited way derogates from the common law rule that no adverse inference should be drawn against him when he has, after caution, exercised that right. It is not without significance that the new standard caution includes the words: ‘But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court’. Where s. 34 does apply, the jury have to be told to consider whether the accused – not a reasonable man but the man being tried, with all the ‘qualities, apprehensions, knowledge and advice . . he is shown to have had at the time’.
Lord Bingham CJ set out the six conditions to be met: ‘What then are the formal conditions to be met before the jury may draw such an inference? In our judgment there are six such conditions. The first is that there must be proceedings against a person for an offence; that condition must necessarily be satisfied before section 34(2)(d) can bite . . The second condition is that the alleged failure must occur before a defendant is charged . . The third condition is that the alleged failure must occur during questioning under caution by a constable . . The fourth condition is that the constable’s questioning must be directed to trying to discover whether or by whom the alleged offence had been committed . . The fifth condition is that the alleged failure by the defendant must be to mention any fact relied on in his defence in those proceedings. That raises two questions of fact: first, is there some fact which the defendant has relied on in his defence; and second, did the defendant fail to mention it to the constable when he was being questioned in accordance with the section? Being questions of fact these questions are for the jury as the tribunal of fact to resolve . . The sixth condition is that the appellant failed to mention a fact which in the circumstances existing at the time the accused could reasonably have been expected to mention when so questioned. The time referred to is the time of questioning, and account must be taken of all the relevant circumstances existing at that time. The courts should not construe the expression ‘in the circumstances’ restrictively: matters such as time of day, the defendant’s age, experience, mental capacity, state of health, sobriety, tiredness, knowledge, personality and legal advice are all part of the relevant circumstances; and those are only examples of things which may be relevant. When reference is made to ‘the accused’ attention is directed not to some hypothetical, reasonable accused of ordinary phlegm and fortitude but to the actual accused with such qualities, apprehensions, knowledge and advice as he is shown to have had at the time.’

Lord Bingham LCJ
[1996] EWCA Crim 1728, [1997] 2 Cr App R 27, Times 19-Dec-1996, [1997] Crim LR 449
Bailii
Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 34(2)(d), Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 78
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedRegina v Gill CACD 21-Jul-2000
When a defendant was silent, it was necessary for the court to be especially careful to give precise and accurate directions on the effect of such silence as to the drawing of adverse inferences. Having answered questions on some aspects, it was not . .
CitedRegina v McGarry CACD 16-Jul-1998
Where the judge decided that no inference could be drawn from the defendant’s silence, because of the absence of facts which could have been mentioned, he had a duty positively to warn the jury not arbitrarily to draw adverse inferences from the . .
CitedRegina v Webber HL 22-Jan-2004
The defendant complained that the judge had given a direction under s34 even though his counsel had only put matters to witnesses for the prosecution.
Held: A positive suggestion put to a witness by or on behalf of a defendant may amount to a . .
CitedPetkar and Farquar, Regina v CACD 16-Oct-2003
The defendants appealed their convictions and sentence for theft. Whilst employed by a bank thay had arranged for transfers to their own account. Each blamed the other. They appealed on the basis that the direction on their silence at interview was . .
CitedT v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 10-Jul-2007
Appeal by case stated against conviction of having secured entry to premises by violence. Inferences to be drawn from defendant’s silence at police interview. The defendant complained that the magstrates should have set out clearly what inferences . .
CitedFitzgerald, Regina v CACD 6-Mar-1998
The defendant appealed against his conviction for robbery. At interview, his solicitor had explained his failure to answer questions by reference to the involvement of others, but in terms which treated this itself as an admission.
Held: The . .
CitedRegina v Roble CACD 21-Jan-1997
The defendant appealed against his conviction for wounding with intent. He had answered ‘no comment’ in the police interview, but claimed self defence at trial. The court considered what note should be taken of the solicitor’s evidence of his advice . .
CitedBlack v Regina CACD 17-Jul-2020
Disclosure Sufficient to Support Inference
The court was asked whether sufficient evidence had been adduced about the strength of the prosecution case at the time of interview, to permit an adverse inference to be drawn from the failure to mention specific facts pursuant to section 34 of the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Police

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.149392

In re Peters: CA 1988

After the defendant was arrested for drugs offences a restraint order was made to prevent dissipation of his assets. Orders were made to vary the restraint to allow payment of his sons school fees, and in family proceedings for a payment to his wife. The Commissioners of Customs and Excise appealed the latter order.
Held: The purpose of a restraint order was to preserve assets so that any confiscation order could be satisfied. Some payments might be allowed but not so as to prejudice the purpose of the restraint. Lord Donaldson of Lymington MR: ‘The Act itself is terminologically complex, but the legislative intention and the broad scheme whereby that intention is to be achieved are reasonably clear. The intention is that no one convicted of drug trafficking offences shall be allowed to retain any part of the proceeds of his crime. The broad scheme involves the making of confiscation orders at the time of sentencing and of prior protective orders. The latter are designed to prevent an accused rendering a confiscation order inappropriate or nugatory by disposing of his assets between the time when an information is about to be laid against him and the making of a confiscation order in the event of conviction.’
Lord Justice Mann said: ‘There is, in the light of section 13(2) no room for the intrusion of sympathy.’

Lord Donaldson of Lymington MR, Mann LJ
[1988] 1 QB 871, [1988] 3 WLR 182, [1988] 3 All ER 46
Drug Trafficking Offences Act 1986 8(1)(5) 13(2)
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedIn re X (Restraint Order: Payment out) QBD 22-Apr-2004
A restraint order had been made in respect of the defendant’s assets pending trial. Application was made to release a sum to pay the defendant’s company debts.
Held: A payment could be made only where the the realisable value of the property . .
CitedRegina v Stannard CACD 1-Nov-2005
The defendant had been convicted of offences in which he had operated to purchase companies and use false debentures to evade corporation tax. Compensation had been sought under the 1988 Act. It was argued that the confiscation order should be . .
CitedStodgell v Stodgell FD FD 18-Jul-2008
The parties were involved in ancillary relief proceedings. At the same time the husband was in prison after having hidden earnings from his business, and was subject to an unsatisfied confiscation order. The guardian had had doubts about the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Criminal Sentencing

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.199327

Regina v Christou (George): HL 10 May 1996

Separate sex offence charges may be tried together even though the evidence is not to be allowed to be accumulated as between the offences. While the question of the admissibility of ‘similar fact’ evidence in relation to various counts joined in the indictment is always an important one to be considered and will frequently govern the outcome of an application to sever, it is not necessarily decisive.
Lord Taylor of Gosforth CJ
Times 10-May-1996, Gazette 10-May-1996, [1997] AC 117
Indictments Act 1915, Indictment Rules 1971 (1971 No 1253)
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedBrizzalari v Regina CACD 19-Feb-2004
Limits to Requests for Adverse Inferences
In closing, prosecuting counsel had suggested that during the trial two matters had been mentioned by the defence which had not been mentioned earlier, and that the jury should feel free to draw proper inferences under the 1984 Act from that . .
CitedHamilton, Regina v CACD 16-Aug-2007
The defendant appealed his conviction for outraging public decency. He had surreptitously filmed up the skirts of women in a supermarket. The offence was only discovered after the films were found on a search of his home for other material. The . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 26 October 2021; Ref: scu.86377

Regina v Croydon Youth Court ex parte Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 8 May 1997

The defendant, a 12 year old boy , had been charged, with others, with offences of violence. He denied the charges. He objected to his interview with admissions being used. On being admitted he then pleaded guilty. Later cases against co-defendants were dismissed on the grounds that the prosecution had failed to adduce evidence to rebut the presumption of doli incapax. The claimant was aggrieved and tried to persuade the magistrates to allow him to change his plea to one of not guilty. The magistrates agreed and ordered that the proceedings should be reopened and the case heard again by a different bench. The Director applied for judicial review.
Held: The application succeeded. The justices were wrong to think they could use the section. The purpose of the section was to rectify mistakes. It is a slip rule and should not be extended to cover situations beyond those akin to a mistake. It was wholly wrong to employ section 142(2) to allow a defendant where he could not appeal to the Crown Court because of his plea. The interests of justice also included the interests of the Courts and the public that people who had pleaded guilty with the advice of counsel should continue to be regarded as guilty and that there should be certainty and an end to litigation.
McCowan LJ Popplewell J
[1997] EWHC Admin 446, [1997] 2 Cr App Rep 411
Bailii
Magistrates Courts Act 1980 142
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedHolme v Liverpool City Justices and Another Admn 6-Dec-2004
The defendant had been convicted of dangerous driving. The victim’s mother complained of the leniency of the sentence, and the magistrates purported to re-open the sentencing under section 142, saying they had been unaware of the very serious nature . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 October 2021; Ref: scu.137391

Regina v Chief Constable of South Wales and Another Ex Parte Merrick: QBD 17 Feb 1994

The court considered the failure of the respondent to comply with a statutory requirement to comply with a request from a detained person to consult a solicitor ‘as soon as practicable’.
Held: For the police to deny access to solicitors at court after the court began at 10am was unlawful at common law, and an infringement of their rights. Ralph Gibson LJ referred to definitions of ‘practicable’ found respectively in the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary and Webster’s Dictionary: ‘capable of being carried out – feasible’ and ‘possible to be accomplished with known means and known resources’ respectively.
Ralph Gibson LJ
Independent 01-Apr-1994, Times 17-Feb-1994, [1994] 1 WLR 663
England and Wales
Citing:
ApprovedDedman v British Building and Engineering Appliances CA 1973
The claimant sought to bring his claim under a provision which required a complaint to the industrial tribunal to be made within four weeks of the dismissal unless the employment tribunal was satisfied that this was not ‘practicable’. He did not . .

Cited by:
CitedNorth Somerset District Council v Honda Motor Europe Ltd and Others QBD 2-Jul-2010
Deleayed Rates Claims Service made them Defective
The council claimed that the defendants were liable for business rates. The defendants said that the notices were defective in not having been served ‘as soon as practicable’, and further that they should not be enforced since the delay had created . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 September 2021; Ref: scu.86359

Regina v Governor of Brixton Prison, Ex parte Walsh: HL 1984

Walsh faced two sets of charges. In one of which he was bailed and in the other he was remanded in custody. The Governor of the prison refused to produce him to the court for the purpose of facing the bailed proceedings.
Held: Habeas corpus may be applied for and granted on occasions such as when there is an excessive delay in bringing a prisoner up for trial.
Lord Fraser referred to Section 29 of the 1961 Act and added that: ‘so the effect of Section 29(1) of the Act of 1961, and of the circular, is that a Governor of a prison may direct a prisoner to be taken to a court if he is satisfied that his attendance at the court is desirable in the interests of justice.’
Lord Fraser
[1985] AC 154, [1984] 2 All ER 609, [1984] 3 WLR 205
Criminal Justice Act 1961 29
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedBourgass and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice SC 29-Jul-2015
The Court considered the procedures when a prisoner is kept in solitary confinement, otherwise described as ‘segregation’ or ‘removal from association’, and principally whether decisions to keep the appellants in segregation for substantial periods . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 11 September 2021; Ref: scu.591144

Regina v Chan-Fook: CACD 15 Nov 1993

‘Actual bodily harm’ under the 1861 Act, may include injury to any part of the body, including internal organs, the nervous system and the brain. It is capable of including psychiatric injury, but not mere emotion such as fear, distress or panic. ‘Similarly an injury can be caused to someone by injuring their health; an assault may have the consequence of infecting the victim with a disease or causing the victim to become ill. The injury may be internal and may not be accompanied by any external injury.’ . . and: ‘In any case where psychiatric injury is relied upon as the basis for an allegation of bodily harm, and the matter has not been admitted by the defence, expert evidence should be called by the prosecution. It should not be left to be inferred by the jury from the general facts of the case. In the absence of appropriate expert evidence, a question whether or not the assault occasioning psychiatric injury should not be left to the jury . . There is no reason for refusing to have regard to psychiatric injury as the consequence of an assault if there is properly qualified evidence that it has occurred.’ and
‘In the case of Attia, the Court of Appeal discussed where the borderline should be drawn between, on the one hand, the emotions of distress and grief and on the other hand some actual psychiatric illness such as anxiety, neurosis or a reactive depression. The authorities recognised that there is a line to be drawn and whether any given case falls on one side or the other is a matter for expert evidence. The civil cases are also concerned with the broader question of the boundaries of the law of negligence and the duty of care, which do not concern us.
Accordingly, the phrase ‘actual bodily harm’ is capable of including psychiatric injury. But it does not include mere emotion such as fear, distress or panic, nor does it include, as such, states of mind that are not themselves evidence of some identifiable clinical condition. The phrase ‘state of mind’ is not a scientific one and should be avoided in considering whether or not the psychiatric injury has been caused; its use is likely to create in the minds of the jury the impression that something which is no more than a strong emotion, such as extreme fear or panic, can amount to actual bodily harm. It cannot. Similarly, juries should not be directed that an assault which causes a hysterical and nervous condition is an assault occasioning actual bodily harm. Where there is evidence that the assault has caused some psychiatric injury, the jury should be directed that injury is capable of amounting to actual bodily harm; otherwise there should be no reference to the mental state of the victim following the assault unless it be relevant to some other aspect of the case, as it was in Roberts’.
Hobhouse J
Times 19-Nov-1993, Ind Summary 15-Nov-1993, [1994] 99 Cr App R 147
Offences Against the Person Act 1861 47
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedRegina v Dica CACD 5-May-2004
Reckless HIV transmission – Grievous Bodily Harm
The defendant appealed against his conviction for inflicting grievous bodily harm. He had HIV/Aids, and was found to have transmitted the disease by intercourse when the victims were not informed of his condition. It was not suggested that any rape . .
ApprovedRegina v Burstow, Regina v Ireland HL 24-Jul-1997
The defendant was accused of assault occasioning actual bodily harm when he had made silent phone calls which were taken as threatening.
Held: An assault might consist of the making of a silent telephone call in circumstances where it causes . .
CitedRegina v Ireland CACD 14-May-1996
Silent telephone calls which resulted in psychiatric damage to the victim could constitute an ‘assault occasioning actual bodily harm’ for the purposes of section 47 of the 1861 Act. Swinton Thomas LJ said: ‘The early cases pre-date the invention of . .
CitedRegina v Burstow Admn 29-Jul-1996
Grievous bodily harm can be inflicted by a stalker without direct physical contact and can include psychological damage. The statute could be interpreted to reflect current standards. . .
CitedRegina v Morris CACD 22-Oct-1997
An allegation of assault occasioning bodily harm, where the harm alleged was of a purely psychological nature, must be supported by psychiatric evidence. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 24 August 2021; Ref: scu.86328

In re K (Minors) (Wardship: Criminal Proceedings): FD 24 Aug 1987

Children had been interviewed by the police before they became wards of court.
Held: It would be a constitutional impropriety for the wardship court to intervene in the statutory process governing the conduct of a criminal trial and in matters within the jurisdiction of the Crown Court so as to grant or refuse leave for minors to be called as witnesses at a criminal trial.
Waterhouse J said: ‘In many cases, the wardship court is likely to be involved at an early stage because leave will have been sought for the police to interview a ward. In such circumstances it is inevitable that the court will have to perform a balancing exercise, weighing the potential damage to the child against the public interest, as a responsible parent would do. In reaching a decision, the best interests of a child may not be the first and paramount consideration . . ‘ and ‘Mrs Puxon accepts on behalf of the Crown Prosecution Service that, in general, it is the practice of the police to obtain the consent of a parent who has the custody of a child before interviewing the child as a potential witness. Similarly, the police work in close co-operation with social services departments in whose care children have been placed and obtain the consent of the department (as in this case) before interviewing a child in care. It is accepted also that, in the case of a ward of court, leave should be obtained from the wardship court before an interview by the police takes place.’ and ‘Once a prosecution has been instituted however, the statutory procedure must (it is said) take its normal course. The Crown Prosecution Service will, of course, consider any representation that may be made by a parent or a local authority about the potential adverse impact upon a child of having to give evidence. This may be one of the matters to be considered in deciding whether or not to proceed with particular charges, but the discretion is vested in the prosecuting authority rather than the parent or the local authority. In the present case, it is said further, an extraordinary and anomalous situation would arise, if the wardship court were to intervene, because the minors might be ‘protected’ from the operation of the statutory rules governing the compellability of witnesses, whereas the other children involved in the case would have no similar protection.’
He concluded: ‘I have no doubt that I should decline to exercise the wardship jurisdiction by either giving leave for the minors to be called as witnesses or by giving a direction in the matter in another form. In my judgment, it is neither necessary nor appropriate in child abuse cases for the Crown Prosecution Service to seek the leave of the wardship court to call a ward as a witness either before or after committal proceedings.
It is necessary, first of all, to set my conclusion in its proper context. In many cases, the wardship court is likely to be involved at an early stage because leave will have to be sought for the police to interview a ward. In such circumstances it is inevitable that the court will have to perform a balancing exercise, weighing the potential damage to the child against the public interest, as a responsible parent would do. In reaching a decision, the best interests of a child may not be the first and paramount consideration, for reasons that I have sufficiently explained. It is clear also that the court will have in mind that, if leave to interview the child is granted, a prosecution based on the child’s evidence, at least in part, may ensue.’
Waterhouse J
[1988] Fam 1
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedRe A Ward of Court FD 4-May-2017
Ward has no extra privilege from Police Interview
The court considered the need to apply to court in respect of the care of a ward of the court when the Security services needed to investigate possible terrorist involvement of her and of her contacts. Application was made for a declaration as to . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 14 August 2021; Ref: scu.588165

Bartlett v Smith: 1843

‘Where a question arises as to the admissibility of evidence, the facts upon which its admissibility depends are to be determined by the judge, and not by the jury. If the opposite course were adopted, it would be equivalent to leaving it to the jury to say whether a particular thing were evidence or not.’
Alderson B
(1843) 11 M and W 483
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedRegina v Mushtaq HL 21-Apr-2005
The defendant was convicted of fraud charges. He sought to have excluded statements made in interview on the basis that they had been obtained by oppressive behaviour by the police. His wife was very seriously ill in hospital and he had made the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 11 August 2021; Ref: scu.224429

SXH v The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS): SC 11 Apr 2017

The Court was asked: ‘Does a decision by a public prosecutor to bring criminal proceedings against a person fall potentially within the scope of article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights in circumstances where a) the prosecutor has reasonable cause to believe the person to be guilty of the offence with which they are charged and b) the law relating to the offence is compatible with article 8?’ The appellant a Somali national fled and sought asylum here. Her identity papers were false, and she was charged under the 2006 Act despite agreement that she would not have been able to obtain proper papers.
Held: The appeal failed. When deciding whether to institute criminal proceedings, the Crown Prosecution Service (‘CPS’) must to apply a two stage test; first, whether there is enough evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction; if so whether the prosecution would be in the public interest.
Article 8 while broad was not so broad as to include all acts of a public authority even when they might encroach more than minimally on the lives of individuals.
Lord Toulson said: ‘The duty of the CPS is to the public, not to the victim or to the suspect, who have separate interests. To recognise a duty of care towards victims or suspects or both, would put the CPS in positions of potential conflict, and would also open the door to collateral interlocutory civil proceedings and trials, which would not be conducive to the best operation of the criminal justice system. Similar considerations are relevant when considering the applicability of article 8 in the context of a decision to prosecute. A decision to prosecute does not of itself involve a lack of respect for the autonomy of the defendant but places the question of determining his or her guilt before the court, which will itself be responsible for deciding ancillary questions of bail or remand in custody and the like.’
Lord Mance, Lord Kerr, Lord Reed, Lord Hughes, Lord Toulson
[2017] UKSC 30, [2017] WLR(D) 270, [2017] Crim LR 712, [2017] 1 WLR 1401, UKSC 2014/0148
Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD, SC, SC Summary, SC Video Summary
Identity Cards Act 2006, European Convention on Human Rights
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRegina v Fregenet Asfaw HL 21-May-2008
The House considered the point of law: ‘If a defendant is charged with an offence not specified in section 31(3) of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999, to what extent is he entitled to rely on the protections afforded by article 31 of the 1951 . .
Appeal fromSXH v Crown Prosecution Service CA 6-Feb-2014
The claimant challenged being charged with an offence under the 2006 Act, saying that it engaged and interfered with her Article 8 Human Rights. A Somali national, she fled, claiming asylum here, but her travel documents were found to be false. All . .
CitedRegina v G (Secretary of State for the Home Department intervening) HL 18-Jun-2008
The defendant was fifteen. He was convicted of statutory rape of a 13 year old girl, believing her to be 15. He appealed saying that as an offence of strict liability he had been denied a right to a fair trial, and also that the offence charged was . .
CitedG v The United Kingdom ECHR 30-Aug-2011
The appellant aged 15, had sexual intercourse with a girl aged 12. He pleaded guilty to a charge of rape of a child under 13, contrary to section 5 of the 2003 Act, on the written basis that the intercourse was consensual in fact (although by reason . .
CitedMichael and Others v The Chief Constable of South Wales Police and Another SC 28-Jan-2015
The claimants asserted negligence in the defendant in failing to provide an adequate response to an emergency call, leading, they said to the death of their daughter at the hands of her violent partner. They claimed also under the 1998 Act. The . .
CitedCalveley v Chief Constable of the Merseyside Police HL 1989
Police officers brought an action in negligence against a Chief Constable on the ground that disciplinary proceedings against them had been negligently conducted. They claimed that the investigating officers had negligently failed to conduct the . .
CitedElguzouli-Daf v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis and Another CA 16-Nov-1994
The Court upheld decisions striking out actions for negligence brought by claimants who had been arrested and held in custody during criminal investigations which were later discontinued. The Crown Prosecution Service owes no general duty of care to . .
CitedE and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 10-Jun-2011
Judicial review was sought of a decision by the respondent to prosecute a child for her alleged sexual abuse of her younger sisters. Agencies other than the police and CPS considered that a prosecution would harm both the applicant and her sisters. . .
CitedBrooks v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and others HL 21-Apr-2005
The claimant was with Stephen Lawrence when they were both attacked and Mr Lawrence killed. He claimed damages for the negligent way the police had dealt with his case, and particularly said that they had failed to assess him as a victim of crime, . .
CitedHertfordshire Police v Van Colle; Smith v Chief Constable of Sussex Police HL 30-Jul-2008
Police Obligations to Witnesses is Limited
A prosecution witness was murdered by the accused shortly before his trial. The parents of the deceased alleged that the failure of the police to protect their son was a breach of article 2.
Held: The House was asked ‘If the police are alerted . .

Cited by:
CitedRobinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police SC 8-Feb-2018
Limits to Police Exemption from Liability
The claimant, an elderly lady was bowled over and injured when police were chasing a suspect through the streets. As they arrested him they fell over on top of her. She appealed against refusal of her claim in negligence.
Held: Her appeal . .
CitedJames-Bowen and Others v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis SC 25-Jul-2018
The Court was asked whether the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (‘the Commissioner’) owes a duty to her officers, in the conduct of proceedings against her based on their alleged misconduct, to take reasonable care to protect them from . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 August 2021; Ref: scu.581648

Regina v Central Criminal Court Ex Parte Guney: HL 10 May 1996

The defendant was given bail supported by sureties for his attendance. The appellant signed for andpound;1m for his attendance. There was a preparatory hearing at a new court building without cells or a dock. The defendant was present. The surety was not. Thinking that they were thereby preserving the recognisance, counsel agreed between themselves that there was no need for the defendant to surrender into the custody of the court. The judge was not aware of that discussion. The defendant then fell to be arraigned having been asked by the judge to stand up in the place in court where he was sitting. There were further hearings but after several of them the defendant absconded by leaving the country and remained away for many years. The Crown sought to estreat the recognisance and the liability of the surety depended upon whether counsel’s agreement meant that the defendant had not surrendered. The prosecution appealed against a decision that he had surrendered to his bail.
Held: Whenever else it might occur surrender is accomplished as a matter of law when the defendant is arraigned. Any practice of a judge directing that despite arraignment the defendant should be deemed not to have surrendered was a direction devoid of legal consequence. A later non attendance at an adjourned hearing did not lead to the forfeiture of a surety.
Lord Goff of Chieveley, Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle, Lord Slynn of Hadley, Lord Steyn, Lord Hoffmann
Times 10-May-1996, [1996] UKHL 11, [1996] AC 616, [1996] 2 All ER 705, [1996] 2 WLR 675
Bailii
Criminal Justice Act 1987 8, Bail Act 1946 3, Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 128
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromRegina v Central Criminal Court Ex Parte Guney CA 2-Feb-1995
A defendant is deemed to have surrendered to court custody when attending as directed; a surety was not estreated when he failed to attend at a later hearing after an adjournment.
Sir Thomas Bingham MR (dissenting) said that there is nothing in . .
At First InstanceRegina v Central Criminal Court Ex Parte Guney QBD 1-Feb-1994
An arraignment was valid despite non attendance at court, and the surety’s duties were not terminated. Arraignment in absence if defendant is not a surrender to custody for bail. . .
CitedDirector of Public Prosecutions v Richards QBD 1988
The defendant had been on bail to appear at the Magistrates’ Court. On the day he arrived in good time. A notice said: ‘All persons due to appear in court please report to the enquiry counter.’ He did so and he obeyed directions which were there . .

Cited by:
Appealed toRegina v Central Criminal Court Ex Parte Guney CA 2-Feb-1995
A defendant is deemed to have surrendered to court custody when attending as directed; a surety was not estreated when he failed to attend at a later hearing after an adjournment.
Sir Thomas Bingham MR (dissenting) said that there is nothing in . .
CitedEvans, Regina v CACD 16-Nov-2011
The defendant came to court, and his counsel informed the court of this, but then he left. Had he surrendered to his bail? He surrendered and was taken to court. He pleaded guilty to the Bail Act offence and was sentenced, but then was allowed to . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 July 2021; Ref: scu.86310

Belhaj and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another: SC 4 Jul 2018

Challenge to decision not to prosecute senior Intelligence Service officials for alleged offences in connection with his unlawful rendition and mistreatment in Libya. The issue here was whether on the hearing of the application for judicial review, it would be open to the Court to receive closed material disclosed only to the court and a special advocate but not to the Appellants. As will appear, this depends on whether the judicial review proceedings are ‘proceedings in a criminal cause or matter’.
Held: The Appellants are entitled to succeed on this appeal because in its ordinary and natural meaning ‘proceedings in a criminal cause or matter’ include proceedings by way of judicial review of a decision made in a criminal cause, and nothing in the context or purpose of the legislation suggests a different meaning. Judicial review as such cannot be regarded as an inherently civil proceeding. It may or may not be, depending on the subject-matter. What is clear is that it is an integral part of the criminal justice system, whose availability is in many cases essential to the fairness of the process and its compliance with article 6 of the Human Rights Convention.
Baroness Hale of Richmond PSC, Lord Wilson, Lord Sumption, Lord Lloyd-Jones JJSC, Lord Mance
[2018] UKSC 33, [2018] 3 WLR 435, [2019] AC 593, [2018] 4 All ER 561, [2018] 2 Cr App R 33, [2018] WLR(D) 441
Bailii, WLRD, Bailii Summary
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromBelhaj and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 1-Dec-2017
The claimants alleged that the defendants had been involved in their unlawful rendition in 2004 from Thailand to Libya, in particular now challenging by judicial review the decision not to prosecute certain senior British Officers. . .
CitedEx parte Alice Woodhall CA 8-May-1888
Extradition proceedings are in their nature criminal proceedings. Lindley LJ said: ‘Can we say that the application in the present case is not an application in a criminal cause or matter? I think that in substance it certainly is. Its whole object . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for The Home Department Ex Parte Simms HL 8-Jul-1999
Ban on Prisoners talking to Journalists unlawful
The two prisoners, serving life sentences for murder, had had their appeals rejected. They continued to protest innocence, and sought to bring their campaigns to public attention through the press, having oral interviews with journalists without . .
CitedIn re S (a Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication) HL 28-Oct-2004
Inherent High Court power may restrain Publicity
The claimant child’s mother was to be tried for the murder of his brother by poisoning with salt. It was feared that the publicity which would normally attend a trial, would be damaging to S, and an application was made for reporting restrictions to . .
CitedRegina v Davis HL 18-Jun-2008
The defendant had been tried for the murder of two men by shooting them at a party. He was identified as the murderer by three witnesses who had been permitted to give evidence anonymously, from behind screens, because they had refused, out of fear, . .
CitedA and Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 19-Feb-2009
(Grand Chamber) The applicants had been subjected to severe restrictions. They were foreign nationals suspected of terrorist involvement, but could not be deported for fear of being tortured. The UK had derogated from the Convention to put the . .
CitedBelhaj and Another v Straw and Others QBD 21-Jul-2017
The claimant sought a declaration that the acts of the defendants had contributed to his unlawful rendition into US custody during the Iraq War, and that such actions were criminal. The Defendants applied for a declaration that these are proceedings . .
CitedKennedy v United Kingdom ECHR 18-May-2010
The claimant complained that after alleging unlawful interception of his communications, the hearing before the Investigatory Powers Tribunal was not attended by appropriate safeguards. He had been a campaigner against police abuse. His requests to . .
CitedSarkandi and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs CA 14-Jul-2015
Appeal from order allowing use of closed material procedures under section 6 of the 2013 Act.
Richards LJ said: ‘The 2013 Act is one of those in which Parliament has stipulated that a closed material procedure may be permitted by the court. It . .
CitedAl Rawi and Others v The Security Service and Others SC 13-Jul-2011
The claimant pursued a civil claim for damages, alleging complicity of the respondent in his torture whilst in the custody of foreign powers. The respondent sought that certain materials be available to the court alone and not to the claimant or the . .
CitedHome Office v Tariq SC 13-Jul-2011
(JUSTICE intervening) The claimant pursued Employment Tribunal proceedings against the Immigration Service when his security clearance was withdrawn. The Tribunal allowed the respondent to use a closed material procedure under which it was provided . .
CitedBlackburn v Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis CA 1968
By common law police officers owe to the general public a duty to enforce the criminal law. However, police are servants of no one but the law itself, and a chief officer of police has a wide discretion as to the manner in which the duty is . .
CitedCorner House Research and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v The Serious Fraud Office HL 30-Jul-2008
SFO Director’s decisions reviewable
The director succeeded on his appeal against an order declaring unlawful his decision to discontinue investigations into allegations of bribery. The Attorney-General had supervisory duties as to the exercise of the duties by the Director. It had . .
CitedRegina v Director of Public Prosecutions, ex parte Kebilene and others HL 28-Oct-1999
(Orse Kebeline) The DPP’s appeal succeeded. A decision by the DPP to authorise a prosecution could not be judicially reviewed unless dishonesty, bad faith, or some other exceptional circumstance could be shown. A suggestion that the offence for . .
CitedMohit v The Director of Public Prosecutions of Mauritius PC 25-Apr-2006
(Mauritius) The board was asked whether the decision of the Director to discontinue a private prosecution was a decision capable of review by the courts under the constitution of Mauritius. . .
CitedAru, Regina (on The Application of) v The Chief Constable of Merseyside CA 30-Jan-2004
Appeal against cautioning after allege public order offence on basis that it had been given other than in accordance with guidelines. . .
CitedRegina v Maidstone Crown Court, ex Parte Harrow London Borough Council QBD 30-Apr-1999
The High Court may review, on an application made by a properly interested party, a decision made by a Crown Court under the Act. Although this related to a trial on indictment, the Crown Court judge had made an order without jurisdiction. . .
CitedRegina v Manchester Crown Court and Ashton and Others, ex parte Director of Public Prosecutions HL 7-May-1993
A Crown Court decision to stay an indictment for lack of jurisdiction, was not susceptible to Judicial Review. This was a ‘decision affecting conduct of trial’. The House considered the meaning of the phrase ‘other than its jurisdiction in matters . .
CitedProvincial Cinematograph Theatres Ltd v Newcastle upon Tyne Profiteering Committee HL 1921
Under Section 1 of the Profiteering Act 1919, the Board of Trade had power to receive and investigate complaints of excessive profiteering. Section 2 of the Act gave a power to establish local committees to make such reports with a view to . .
CitedHaralambous, Regina (on The Application of) v Crown Court at St Albans and Another SC 24-Jan-2018
The appellant challenged by review the use of closed material first in the issue of a search warrant, and subsequently to justify the retention of materials removed during the search.
Held: The appeal failed. No express statutory justification . .
CitedBarras v Aberdeen Steam Trawling and Fishing Co HL 17-Mar-1933
The court looked at the inference that a statute’s draughtsman could be assumed when using a phrase to rely on a known interpretation of that phrase.
Viscount Buckmaster said: ‘It has long been a well established principle to be applied in the . .
CitedAmand v Home Secretary and Minister of Defence of Royal Netherlands Government HL 1943
A Dutch serviceman who had been arrested for desertion and brought before a magistrate who ordered him to be handed over to the Dutch military authorities under the Allied Forces Act 1940. An application for habeas corpus was rejected by a . .
CitedZH and CN, Regina (on The Applications of) v London Boroughs of Newham and Lewisham SC 12-Nov-2014
The court was asked whether the 1977 Act required a local authorty to obtain a court order before taking possession of interim accommodation it provided to an apparently homeless person while it investigated whether it owed him or her a duty under . .
CitedRegina v Inland Revenue Commissioners ex parte Rossminster Ltd HL 13-Dec-1979
The House considered the power of an officer of the Board of Inland Revenue to seize and remove materials found on premises which a warrant obtained on application to the Common Serjeant authorised him to enter and search; but where the source of . .
CitedGuardian News and Media Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court CA 3-Apr-2012
The newspaper applied for leave to access documents referred to but not released during the course of extradition proceedings in open court.
Held: The application was to be allowed. Though extradition proceedings were not governed by the Civil . .
CitedCarnduff v Inspector Rock and Chief Constable West Midlands Police CA 11-May-2001
The claimant was a police informer. Over several years he had given and been paid for information. He claimed that on one occasion he had given information which had led to the arrest of a major criminal, but the police denied that any information . .
CitedGuardian News and Media Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court and Another CA 25-Oct-2011
The claimant newspaper sought to appeal against a refusal by the respondent to disclose papers filed in a case before it. The court considered whether it had jurisdiction to hear an appeal.
Held: Under the 1981 Act no appeal would lie if the . .
CitedEx parte Pulbrook QBD 11-Mar-1892
A judge in chambers gave permission pursuant to the Law of Libel Amendment Act 1888 to bring proceedings for criminal libel. The proposed defendant sought to appeal. This raised the question whether the order was made in ‘criminal proceedings’ . .
CitedKhaled and Another v The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and Others Admn 15-Jun-2017
The Claimants were designated by the UN Sanctions Committee in 2007 and 2008 respectively as individuals suspected of being associated with Al-Qaida and the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, and of being involved in terrorism. They sought judicial . .
CitedMcgartland and Another v Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 14-Jul-2015
Appeal against a declaration under section 6 of the 2013 Act that proceedings brought by Mr McGartland and his long-term partner, Ms Asher, are ‘proceedings in which a closed material application may be made to the court’. . .
CitedCF v The Security Service and Others QBD 7-Nov-2013
The claimants alleged that the defendants had been complicit in their unlawful detention, torture and mistreatment whilst held in Somalia pending being brought to the UK in 2011. The defendants now applied for a declaration permitting closed . .
CitedRegina v Inland Revenue Commissioners, Ex parte T C Coombs and Co HL 1991
The House heard an application judicially to review a notice served by an inspector of taxes under section 20 of the 1970 Act, requiring T C Coombs and Co to deliver or make available for inspection documents in their possession relevant to the tax . .
CitedFarrell v Alexander HL 24-Jun-1976
The House considered the construction of a consolidation Act.
Held: It is ordinarily both unnecessary and undesirable to construe a consolidation Act by reference to statutory antecedents, but it is permissible to do so in a case where the . .
CitedBarras v Aberdeen Steam Trawling and Fishing Co HL 17-Mar-1933
The court looked at the inference that a statute’s draughtsman could be assumed when using a phrase to rely on a known interpretation of that phrase.
Viscount Buckmaster said: ‘It has long been a well established principle to be applied in the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 July 2021; Ref: scu.619944

Haralambous, Regina (on The Application of) v Crown Court at St Albans and Another: SC 24 Jan 2018

The appellant challenged by review the use of closed material first in the issue of a search warrant, and subsequently to justify the retention of materials removed during the search.
Held: The appeal failed. No express statutory justification existed, but equally there was no restriction on the use of such materials in what was an ex parte procedure.
The statutory scheme of PACE and the CJPA itself permits the relevant magistrate or court to have regard to material which cannot on public interest grounds be disclosed to a person affected by a warrant or order. It involves a purely ex parte process, directed to premises, rather than any particular person, and is designed to be operated speedily and simply, on information provided by a constable satisfying a magistrate that there are reasonable grounds for believing the matters stated in section 8(1). There is nothing in the statutory scheme which expressly restricts the information on which the magistrate may act. Parliament made no express provision for the information on which the warrant was sought to take any particular form or to be disclosed, even after the issue of the warrant, to any person affected.
Police had to be candid with the Magistrate, but a requirement that all such material be disclosed to the subject of the investigation would be inhibitive.
Lord Mance, Deputy President, Lord Kerr, Lord Hughes, Lady Black, Lord Lloyd-Jones
[2018] UKSC 1, [2018] Crim LR 672, [2018] Lloyd’s Rep FC 71, [2018] 2 All ER 303, [2018] AC 236, [2018] 2 WLR 357, [2018] 1 Cr App R 26, [2018] WLR(D) 35, UKSC 2016/0130
Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD, SC, SC Summary, SC Summary Video, SC 08112017 am Video, SC 08112017pm video
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 111 113(4), Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 59
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromHaralambous v St Albans Crown Court and Another Admn 22-Apr-2016
This judicial review raised for express decision whether a person whose premises have been searched and whose property seized under a search warrant must have enough information grounding the warrant to judge its lawfulness and the retention of the . .
CitedCarnduff v Inspector Rock and Chief Constable West Midlands Police CA 11-May-2001
The claimant was a police informer. Over several years he had given and been paid for information. He claimed that on one occasion he had given information which had led to the arrest of a major criminal, but the police denied that any information . .
CitedAl Rawi and Others v The Security Service and Others SC 13-Jul-2011
The claimant pursued a civil claim for damages, alleging complicity of the respondent in his torture whilst in the custody of foreign powers. The respondent sought that certain materials be available to the court alone and not to the claimant or the . .
CitedCronin, Regina (on The Application of) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police and Another Admn 20-Nov-2002
The applicant had had his premises searched. He sought to challenge the basis on which search warrant had been granted. He argued that under the Convention, it was necessary for the magistrates to provide a written record of the reasons for granting . .
CitedEnergy Financing Team Ltd and others v The Director of the Serious Fraud Office, Bow Street Magistrates Court Admn 22-Jul-2005
The claimants sought to set aside warrants and executions under them to provide assistance to a foreign court investigating alleged unlawful assistance to companies in Bosnia Herzegovina.
Held: The issue of such a warrant was a serious step. . .
CitedGittins v Central Criminal Court Admn 14-Jan-2011
The claimant sought judicial review of decisions to issues search warrants to HMRC in respect of his premises. HMRC wanted to look for evidence of tax avoidance schemes which it thought might be unlawful. Until the morning of the hearing, HMRC . .
CitedCommissioner of Police for The Metropolis v Bangs Admn 3-Mar-2014
Where the police were objecting to the disclosure to a person affected of information relied upon before a magistrate to obtain a search and seizure warrant, the magistrates’ court was not functus officio, and any challenge to the withholding was an . .
CitedBritish Sky Broadcasting Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v The Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis SC 12-Mar-2014
The court was asked as to the powers of Magistrates hearing an application for a search warrant to receive excluded or special procedure material which had not been disclosed to the respondent. The court had overturned an order made by the district . .
CitedGolfrate Property Management Ltd and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v The Crown Court At Southwark and Another Admn 25-Mar-2014
The claimants sought to have set aside search and seizure warrants obtained to further enquiries into suspected breaches of EU sanctions against ZANU-PF of Zimbabwe. They alleged non-disclosure and misrepresentation.
Held: A decision to claim . .
CitedThe Competition and Markets Authority v Concordia International Rx (UK) Ltd ChD 16-Nov-2017
The Authority had obtained and executed a search warrant against the defendant’s premises, but now sought to restrain disclosure of the materials upon which it had obtained that warrant, asserting Public Interest Immunity.
Held: An application . .
CitedEntick v Carrington KBD 1765
The Property of Every Man is Sacred
The King’s Messengers entered the plaintiff’s house and seized his papers under a warrant issued by the Secretary of State, a government minister.
Held: The common law does not recognise interests of state as a justification for allowing what . .
CitedRegina v Inland Revenue Commissioners ex parte Rossminster Ltd HL 13-Dec-1979
The House considered the power of an officer of the Board of Inland Revenue to seize and remove materials found on premises which a warrant obtained on application to the Common Serjeant authorised him to enter and search; but where the source of . .
CitedConway v Rimmer HL 28-Feb-1968
Crown Privilege for Documents held by the Polie
The plaintiff probationary police constable had been investigated, prosecuted and cleared of an allegation of theft. He now claimed damages for malicious prosecution, and in the course of the action, sought disclosure of five documents, but these . .
CitedLeander v Sweden ECHR 26-Mar-1987
Mr Leander had been refused employment at a museum located on a naval base, having been assessed as a security risk on the basis of information stored on a register maintained by State security services that had not been disclosed him. Mr Leander . .
CitedMichalak v General Medical Council and Others SC 1-Nov-2017
Dr M had successfully challenged her dismissal and recovered damages for unfair dismissal and race discrimination. In the interim, Her employer HA had reported the dismissal to the respondent who continued their proceedings despite the decision in . .
CitedRegina v Inland Revenue Commissioners, Ex parte T C Coombs and Co HL 1991
The House heard an application judicially to review a notice served by an inspector of taxes under section 20 of the 1970 Act, requiring T C Coombs and Co to deliver or make available for inspection documents in their possession relevant to the tax . .
CitedEsbester v United Kingdom ECHR 2-Apr-1993
(Commission) The claimant had been refused employment within the Central Office of Information. He had been accepted subject to clearance, but that failed. He objected that he had been given no opportunity to object to the material oin which his . .
CitedBank Mellat v Her Majesty’s Treasury (No 2) SC 19-Jun-2013
The bank challenged measures taken by HM Treasury to restrict access to the United Kingdom’s financial markets by a major Iranian commercial bank, Bank Mellat, on the account of its alleged connection with Iran’s nuclear weapons and ballistic . .
CitedAttorney General v Danhai Williams and others PC 12-May-1997
(Jamaica) Customs investigating officers on attended the appellant’s premises in the course of an investigation of fraudulent importation. The officers were met by a hostile crowd, and the claimant did not attend for interview as invited. A search . .
CitedHome Office v Tariq SC 13-Jul-2011
(JUSTICE intervening) The claimant pursued Employment Tribunal proceedings against the Immigration Service when his security clearance was withdrawn. The Tribunal allowed the respondent to use a closed material procedure under which it was provided . .
CitedKadi v Commission ECFI 30-Sep-2010
ECFI Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities associated with Usama bin Laden, the Al-Qaeda network and the Taliban – Regulation (EC) No 881/2002 – . .
CitedRegina v Davis HL 18-Jun-2008
The defendant had been tried for the murder of two men by shooting them at a party. He was identified as the murderer by three witnesses who had been permitted to give evidence anonymously, from behind screens, because they had refused, out of fear, . .
CitedKennedy v United Kingdom ECHR 18-May-2010
The claimant complained that after alleging unlawful interception of his communications, the hearing before the Investigatory Powers Tribunal was not attended by appropriate safeguards. He had been a campaigner against police abuse. His requests to . .
CitedSecretary of State for the Home Department v AF AN and AE (No 3) HL 10-Jun-2009
The applicants complained that they had been made subject to non-derogating control orders as suspected terrorists, but that the failure to inform them of the allegations or evidence against them was unfair and infringed their human rights. The . .
CitedStanford International Bank Ltd, Re CA 25-Feb-2010
Hughes LJ said: ‘it is essential that the duty of candour laid upon any applicant for an order without notice is fully understood and complied with. It is not limited to a duty not to misrepresent. It consists in a duty to consider what any other . .

Cited by:
CitedThe Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) v Concordia International Rx (UK) Ltd CA 7-Aug-2018
The Authority had obtained a search warrant on an ex parte application. The defendant sought a rehearing, but the Authority sought to rely upon material for which it now asserted public interest immunity in material already used. At first instance, . .
CitedThe Competition and Markets Authority v Concordia International Rx (UK) Ltd ChD 8-Nov-2018
Whether to appoint special advocate. The Authority wished to pursue an investigation relying upon material for which it asserted Public Interest Immunity. . .
CitedThe Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) v Concordia International Rx (UK) Ltd ChD 12-Dec-2018
Challenge to search warrants issued under the 1998 Act. . .
CitedThe Competition and Markets Authority v Concordia International Rx (UK) Ltd ChD 16-Jan-2019
Application to vary search warrant.
Held: Refused. . .
CitedBelhaj and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another SC 4-Jul-2018
Challenge to decision not to prosecute senior Intelligence Service officials for alleged offences in connection with his unlawful rendition and mistreatment in Libya. The issue here was whether on the hearing of the application for judicial review, . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 July 2021; Ref: scu.603120

Belhaj and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 1 Dec 2017

The claimants alleged that the defendants had been involved in their unlawful rendition in 2004 from Thailand to Libya, in particular now challenging by judicial review the decision not to prosecute certain senior British Officers.
Irwin LJ, Popplewell J
[2017] EWHC 3056 (Admin), [2017] WLR(D) 808
Bailii, WLRD
Justice and Security Act 2013 6
England and Wales
Citing:
See AlsoBelhaj and Another v Straw and Others SC 17-Jan-2017
The claimant alleged complicity by the defendant, (now former) Foreign Secretary, in his mistreatment by the US while held in Libya. He also alleged involvement in his unlawful abduction and removal to Libya, from which had had fled for political . .
See AlsoBelhaj and Another v Straw and Others QBD 21-Jul-2017
The Defendants apply for a declaration that these are proceedings in which a closed material application may be made pursuant to section 6 of the 2013 Act. . .

Cited by:
See AlsoBelhaj and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions and Others Admn 15-Mar-2018
A claim that the DPP erred in her decision not to prosecute for alleged involvement in the unlawful rendition of the Claimants to Libya. . .
See AlsoBelhaj and Others v Director of Public Prosecutions and Others Admn 15-Mar-2018
Second judgment on the scope of privilege to which we have both contributed – inadvertent disclosure . .
See AlsoBelhaj and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions and Others Admn 3-May-2018
Incorrect disclosure of non-redacted material in closed hearing. . .
Appeal fromBelhaj and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another SC 4-Jul-2018
Challenge to decision not to prosecute senior Intelligence Service officials for alleged offences in connection with his unlawful rendition and mistreatment in Libya. The issue here was whether on the hearing of the application for judicial review, . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 29 July 2021; Ref: scu.601431

Regina v Andrews: CACD 15 Oct 1998

Potential jurors should not be asked questions to test for bias, save in the most exceptional circumstances and where there was a possibility of a juror having a personal involvement; perhaps having a personal loss from the alleged crime.
Times 15-Oct-1998, Gazette 11-Nov-1998
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedAttorney General’s Guidelines on the Exercise by the Crown of its Right of Stand-by 1989
. .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 July 2021; Ref: scu.86051

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

Regina v Hodges (George David): CACD 5 Jun 1981

The court considered a claim that the indictment was invalid.
Held: Peter Pain J said: ‘It seems to us that it is impossible for a criminal trial to start without there being a valid indictment to which the defendant can plead, and that the bill of indictment does not become an indictment until it is signed’.
Peter Pain
Unreported, 5 June 1981
Administration of Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1933 2(2)
England and Wales
Cited by:
AppliedRegina v Morais CACD 1988
A High Court judge had given leave to prefer a voluntary bill against the appellant, who was arraigned on six counts in the voluntary bill. He pleaded not guilty, was convicted on four counts and was sentenced. Relying on section 2 of the 1933 Act, . .
CitedClarke, Regina v; Regina v McDaid HL 6-Feb-2008
An indictment had not been signed despite a clear statutory provision that it should be. The defects were claimed to have been cured by amendment before sentence.
Held: The convictions failed. Sections 1(1) and 2(1) of the 1933 Act which . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 July 2021; Ref: scu.267622

Anderson v The Queen: PC 13 Jul 1971

(Jamaica) A appealed his conviction of murder. Juries are not free, on the other hand, uncritically to reject unchallenged expert evidence on a matter calling for scientific expertise.
[1971] UKPC 25, [1971] 3 WLR 718, [1971] 3 All ER 76, [1972] AC 100
Bailii
Commonwealth
Cited by:
CitedBrennan v Regina CACD 21-Nov-2014
The defendant, then 22 had a history of disturbed childhood, sexual abuse and outpatient mental health treatment together with one instance when he was sectioned following a suicide attempt. On the undisputed psychiatric evidence he suffered from a . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 04 June 2021; Ref: scu.444466

Regina v Central Criminal Court Ex Parte Guney: CA 2 Feb 1995

A defendant is deemed to have surrendered to court custody when attending as directed; a surety was not estreated when he failed to attend at a later hearing after an adjournment.
Sir Thomas Bingham MR (dissenting) said that there is nothing in the process of arraignment which in law requires, or in fact amounts to, a surrender to the custody of the court.
Sir Peter Gibson LJ said: ‘In my judgment a surrender to the custody of the court occurs when a defendant on bail and under a duty so to surrender is required to attend the court and responds by attending the court and overtly subjecting himself to the directions of the court. This he does at the latest when he is arraigned at the commencement of the trial, but he may do so earlier.’
Sir Michael Mann said that ‘Arraignment provides a clearly identifiable moment of surrender (which may, however, in some cases occur earlier).’
Sir Thomas Bingham MR, Sir Peter Gibson LJ, Sir Michael Mann
Gazette 08-Mar-1995, Times 03-Feb-1995, Independent 02-Feb-1995, [1995] 1 WLR 576
Bail Act 1946 3, Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 128
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromRegina v Central Criminal Court Ex Parte Guney QBD 1-Feb-1994
An arraignment was valid despite non attendance at court, and the surety’s duties were not terminated. Arraignment in absence if defendant is not a surrender to custody for bail. . .
Appealed toRegina v Central Criminal Court Ex Parte Guney HL 10-May-1996
The defendant was given bail supported by sureties for his attendance. The appellant signed for andpound;1m for his attendance. There was a preparatory hearing at a new court building without cells or a dock. The defendant was present. The surety . .

Cited by:
Appeal fromRegina v Central Criminal Court Ex Parte Guney HL 10-May-1996
The defendant was given bail supported by sureties for his attendance. The appellant signed for andpound;1m for his attendance. There was a preparatory hearing at a new court building without cells or a dock. The defendant was present. The surety . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 02 June 2021; Ref: scu.86313

Regina v Vye etc: CACD 7 Apr 1993

Detailed guidance was given on good character directions, as to how and when they should be given, but: ‘Provided that the judge indicates to the jury the two respects in which good character may be relevant, ie credibility and propensity, this Court will be slow to criticise any qualifying remarks he may make based on the facts of the individual case.’
A defendant may call evidence of his own good character or other evidence ‘in disproof of his own guilt’ of the offence charged against him. It is incumbent on a trial judge to direct the jury as to the significance of a good character in relation to both credibility and the (un)likelihood of the defendant having committed the offence charged: ‘It might be thought that in such a case (where the defendant charged with murder admits manslaughter) a second limb direction would be little help to the jury.’
Lord Taylor CJ suggested that in murder/manslaughter cases the judge might properly stress that the jury would derive limited help from the absence of any propensity for violence.
Lord Taylor CJ
Gazette 07-Apr-1993, Independent 15-Apr-1993, [1993] 97 Cr App R 134, [1993] 1 WLR 471
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedRegina v Randall (EP) CACD 21-Feb-2003
The defendant had been a co-accused on a charge of murder. He appealed saying the judge had incorrectly directed the jury on the relevance of his co-accused’s previous convictions for violence.
Held: The appeal was allowed. He should have been . .
CitedRegina v Randall HL 18-Dec-2003
Two defendants accused of murder each sought to place blame for the victim’s death on the other. One sought to rely upon the other’s record of violence as evidence of his co-accused’s propensity to violence.
Held: The record was admissible. By . .
AppliedThompson v The Queen PC 16-Feb-1998
(Saint Vincent and the Grenadines) When a defendant is of good character, ie has no convictions of any relevance or significance, he is entitled to the benefit of a good character direction from the judge when summing up to the jury, tailored to fit . .
CitedTeeluck and John v The State PC 23-Mar-2005
(Trinidad and Tobago) The defendant appealed against his conviction saying that his defence had been incompetent in having failed to require the judge to give a good character direction to the jury.
Held: The appeal was allowed. Recent cases . .
CitedMantoor Ramdhanie and others v The State PC 15-Dec-2005
PC (Trinidad and Tobago) The defendant appealed his conviction, saying he had not been properly able to pur forward his evidence of good character. The judge had prevented the defence putting questions to show a . .
ConsideredRegina v Cain CACD 1-Nov-1993
Three defendants faced the jury. One with and two without a good character. The criminal convictions of the second were made known by her to the jury. The first defendant now appealed complaining at the way the judge had given his directions.
CitedRegina v Heath CACD 1-Feb-1994
The defendant complained that the judge had wrongly admitted details of past spent convictions. The judge had told the jury ‘entirely to ignore them as far as this case is concerned’.
Held: The convictions were ‘so lacking in significance to . .
CitedPayton, Regina v CACD 26-May-2006
The defendant appealed a conviction of possession of 66 grams of cannabis with intent to supply. Also found were a large number of small bags and pounds 7,000 in cash. The defendant said the cannabis was for his personal use, and the equipment had . .
CitedMohammed, Regina v CACD 13-Jul-2005
The court granted permission to appeal against a conviction for murder on grounds that related to the judge’s summing up in respect of provocation: ‘Although Holley is a decision of the Privy Council and Morgan Smith a decision of the House of . .
CitedGAI v Regina CACD 5-Oct-2012
The defendant’s appeal based on the absence of a good character direction had succeeded. The court now gave its reasons.
Held: After reviewing the authorities, the appeal succeeded: ‘the learned judge was wrong to find that the fact that . .
CitedRegina v Gray CACD 30-Apr-2004
The court examined the authorities as to good chracter directions where a defendant had previous convictions. Rix LJ said: ‘In our judgment the authorities discussed above entitled us to state the following principles as applicable in this context: . .
CitedRegina v Lloyd CACD 2000
The court in Lloyd was concerned with character directions which had been given in the form of questions.
Held: The conviction was unsafe. Good character directions should not be given in the form of a question, they should be given in the . .
CitedMoustakim, Regina v CACD 27-Nov-2008
Appeal from conviction of being knowingly concerned in the fraudulent evasion of the prohibition on the importation of a controlled drug of Class A, that is to say cocaine. Challenge to good character direction ‘You know from the officer that the . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 01 June 2021; Ref: scu.88223

Regina v Hnedish: 1958

(Canada) ‘Having regard to all the implications involved in accepting the full impact of the Hammond decision [1941] 3 All ER 318 which can, I think, be summarised by saying that regardless of how much physical or mental torture or abuse has been inflicted on an accused to coerce him into telling what is true, the confession is admitted because it is in fact true regardless of how it was obtained, I cannot believe that the Hammond decision does reflect the final judicial reasoning of the English courts . . I do not see how under the guise of ‘credibility’ the court can transmute what is initially an inquiry as to the ‘admissibility’ of the confession into an inquisition of an accused. That would be repugnant to our accepted standards and principles of justice; it would invite and encourage brutality in the handling of persons suspected of having committed offences’
Hall CJ
[1958] 26 WWR 685
Canada
Cited by:
ApprovedWong Kam-Ming v The Queen PC 20-Dec-1978
The voir dire system allows a defendant to give his evidence on the limited issues surrounding the circumstances under which his statement was made as to the admissibility of the confession, without infringing his right to elect not to give evidence . .
CitedA, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, Mahmoud Abu Rideh Jamal Ajouaou v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 11-Aug-2004
The claimants had each been detained without trial for more than two years, being held as suspected terrorists. They were free leave to return to their own countries, but they feared for their lives if returned. They complained that the evidence . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 01 June 2021; Ref: scu.199969

Attorney General’s Reference (No 2 of 2000): CACD 23 Nov 2000

The defendant had faced a charge of possessing an offensive weapon, namely a rice flail. The judge invited the prosecution to reconsider the case before it started, but the case went ahead. After the jury was empanelled, but before the prosecutor opened, the judge discharged the jury, saying that the defendant had a reasonable excuse for having the rice flail, and that the prosecution was bound to fail.
Held: The authorities were clear, and the judge did not have that power. Once a case reached the Crown Court, the defendant was to be arraigned and tried unless: I) on a motion to quash, the indictment was found defective; ii) the defendant successfully pleaded autrefois acquit or convict; iii) a nolle prosequi was entered by the Attorney General ; iv) The offence was not capable of being tried at the Crown Court; or v) the proceedings amounted to an abuse. None of these applied in this case, and: ‘The trial judge simply did not have the power to prevent the prosecution from calling evidence on the basis that he thought a conviction was unlikely.’
Kennedy LJ
Times 23-Nov-2000
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRegina v Middlesex Quarter Sessions, ex parte Director of Public Prosecutions QBD 1952
The court considered a trial on indictment where there was jurisdiction to try the offence charged. After pleas had been taken and counsel for the Crown had opened the prosecution case to the jury, the chairman intervened and directed the jury to . .
CitedRegina v Chairman, London County Quarter Sessions, ex parte Downes 1953
The Judge had acceded to a defence submission of no case, made in advance of arraignment on the basis of the depositions, and had quashed the indictments.
Held: The Divisional Court granted an order of mandamus requiring the court to try the . .
CitedDirector of Public Prosecutions v Humphrys HL 1977
Humphrys was charged with driving while disqualified. The issue was the correctness of the identification by a police constable. In evidence, Humphrys denied that he was the driver, or indeed that he had driven any car during the year in question. . .

Cited by:
CitedN Ltd and Another, Regina v CACD 10-Jun-2008
The defence had requested and been give a ruling of no case to answer. The prosecutor now appealed saying that this had been before he had closed the prosecution case, and had been not with his consent.
Held: The prosecutor’s appeal succeeded. . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 May 2021; Ref: scu.77963

Regina v Criminal Cases Review Commission ex parte Pearson: 1999

The applicant was convicted of murder and her application for leave to appeal against conviction was dismissed. She later asked that her case be referred to the court of appeal on the ground of diminished responsibility, a ground not put forward earlier but now supported by a psychiatric report. In due course her case was transferred to the CCRC. Under section 9 it was not permitted to refer a case to the court of appeal unless it considered there was a ‘real possibility’ that the conviction would not be upheld. The CCRC declined to refer on the ground that there was no likelihood of the court of appeal receiving the new evidence. The applicant sought judicial review.
Held: The CCRC had rightly sought to anticipate whether there was a real possibility of the court of appeal receiving the new evidence, that there were no grounds for impugning its decision and that the application would therefore be dismissed. Lord Bingham referred to previous cases in which fresh evidence from the applicant himself had been considered.
Lord Bingham CJ said: ‘Thus the Commission’s power to refer under section 9 is exercisable only if it considers that if the reference were made there would be a real possibility that the conviction would not be upheld by the Court of Appeal. The exercise of the power to refer accordingly depends on the judgment of the Commission, and it cannot be too strongly emphasised that this is a judgment entrusted to the Commission and to no one else. Save in exceptional circumstances, the judgment must be made by the Commission, in a conviction case, on the ground of an argument or evidence which has not been before the court before, whether at trial, on application for leave to appeal or on appeal. In the absence of such exceptional circumstances, the Commission cannot therefore invite the court to review issues or evidence upon which there has already been a ruling. Resort to the Commission must ordinarily follow and not precede resort to the Court of Appeal.’ and ‘The ‘real possibility’ test prescribed in section 13(1)(a) of the 1995 Act as the threshold which the Commission must judge to be crossed before a conviction may be referred to the Court of Appeal is imprecise but plainly denotes a contingency which, in the Commission’s judgment, is more than an outside chance or a bare possibility but which may be less than a probability or a likelihood or a racing certainty. The Commission must judge that there is at least a reasonable prospect of a conviction, if referred, not being upheld. The threshold test is carefully chosen: if the Commission were almost automatically to refer all but the most obviously threadbare cases, its function would be mechanical rather than judgmental and the Court of Appeal would be burdened with a mass of hopeless appeals; if, on the other hand, the Commission were not to refer any case unless it judged the applicant’s prospect of success on appeal to be assured, the cases of some deserving applicants would not be referred to the Court and the beneficial object which the Commission was established to achieve would be to that extent defeated. The Commission is entrusted with the power and the duty to judge which cases cross the threshold and which do not.’
Lord Bingham of Cornhill CJ
[1999] 3 All ER 498, [2000] 1 Cr App R 141
Criminal Appeal Act 1995 9
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedGibson, Regina v CACD 11-Jan-2006
The defendant renewed has application for leave to appeal against his conviction for the murder of his daughter-in-law. The principle evidence against him was that of an accomplice. She had received letters to say that no further action would be . .
AppliedDowsett v Criminal Cases Review Commission Admn 8-Jun-2007
The claimant had been convicted in 1993 of involvement in a murder. He had complained that the police had failed to disclose material which would have been of assistance to him. He had requested the Commission to take examine and pursue his appeal. . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 May 2021; Ref: scu.237576

Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another, ex parte Singh (Prem): QBD 27 Apr 1993

A prisoner who was detained ‘during HM pleasure’ is to be allowed to see all reports before the Parole Board considering his release save those for which Public Interest Immunity Certificate has been given.
Times 27-Apr-1993, Independent 11-Jun-1993
Criminal Justice Act 1967 4, Criminal Justice Act 1991 34
England and Wales

Updated: 16 May 2021; Ref: scu.87819

Regina (on the Applications of Salubi and Another) v Bow Street Magistrates Court: Admn 10 May 2002

The several applicants had been accused of offences under which the cases were to be transferred direct to the Crown Court for trial. The charges were later amended, with alternative offences preferred for which similar procedures might be and were applied. The defendants challenged the application of the new procedures other than to the initial charges. Two offences had been committed before the Act.
Held: Proceedings against a defendant did not become proceedings in respect of a new charge as a result of prosecutorial substitution. The substituted cases were therefore properly dealt with under the new procedure. The duty of the court under section 51 of the 1998 Act to send a case to the Crown Court does not preclude it from exercising its jurisdiction to stay proceedings as an abuse of the process, though it will very rarely be appropriate to do so.
Lord Justice Auld and Mr Justice Gage
Times 04-Jun-2002, [2002] EWHC 919 (Admin), [2002] 2 Cr App R 40, [2002] 1 WLR 3073
Bailii
Crime and Disorder Act 1998 51
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRex v Norfolk Justices and Another ex parte Director of Public Prosecutions 1950
The justices, having convicted a defendant, purported first to commit him to quarter sessions for sentence but the case was not one to which the sub-section applied.
Held: The committal was a nullity and the justices were entitled to proceed . .

Cited by:
CitedCraik, Chief Constable of Northumbria Police, Regina (on The Application of) v Newcastle Upon Tyne Magistrates’ Court Admn 30-Apr-2010
The claimant a retired Chief Constable sought judicial review of a decision to commit him for trial on a charge of unlawful imprisonment. The suspect and now prosecutor had been arrested and held in custody, but without the necessary timely review . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 06 May 2021; Ref: scu.172210

Environment Agency v Campbell and Another: QBD 18 May 1998

Magistrates who had dismissed a prosecution for the failure of the prosecutor to attend court and without any consideration of the merits, were able to hear a subsequent summons issued on same facts.
Times 18-May-1998, Times 18-May-1998, Gazette 10-Jun-1998
Magistrates Courts Act 1980 15
England and Wales

Updated: 03 May 2021; Ref: scu.80338

A, Regina (on The Application of) v Lowestoft Magistrates’ Court: Admn 26 Mar 2013

A had pleaded guilty to a charge of being drunk in a public place, while having the charge of a child under the age of 7 years, contrary to section 2(1) of the Licensing Act 1902. The child in question was A’s daughter, to whom I shall refer as B. B was 2 and a half years old. A was an elected councillor and likely to be well known in the local community. The magistrates refused to make an order anonymising the case being not convinced that any damage would flow for the child.
Held: Section 39 of the CYP Act engages important, and competing, principles, namely, on the one hand, the private and family life of a child, and the best interests of that child, and, on the other hand, the freedom of the media to publish, and of the public to receive, information or comment, and the requirements of open justice.
Picthford lJ, Kenneth Parker J
[2013] EWHC 659 (Admin), [2013] WLR(D) 177, [2014] 1 WLR 1489, [2013] EMLR 20, [2013] Crim LR 763, (2013) 177 JP 377, 177 JP 377
Bailii, WLRD
Children and Young Persons Act 1933 39, European Convention on Human Rights 8 10
Citing:
CitedA Child v Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust QBD 4-Mar-2011
The court gave its reasons for making an order preventing identification of a child claimant in professional negligence proceedings.
Held: By virtue of the Human Rights Act 1998, the court, as a public authority, must take account of these . .
Citedex parte Godwin CA 1992
An order had been made to include provision that ‘the names and addresses of the defendants shall . . not be revealed or published’. The court was now asked whether a criminal court had power under section 39 of the CYP Act to prohibit in terms the . .
CitedRegina v Legal Aid Board ex parte Kaim Todner (a Firm of Solicitors) CA 10-Jun-1998
Limitation on Making of Anonymity Orders
A firm of solicitors sought an order for anonymity in their proceedings against the LAB, saying that being named would damage their interests irrespective of the outcome.
Held: The legal professions have no special part in the law as a party . .
CitedIn re S (a Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication) HL 28-Oct-2004
Inherent High Court power may restrain Publicity
The claimant child’s mother was to be tried for the murder of his brother by poisoning with salt. It was feared that the publicity which would normally attend a trial, would be damaging to S, and an application was made for reporting restrictions to . .
CitedJIH v News Group Newspapers Ltd CA 31-Jan-2011
Principles on Request for Anonymity Order
The defendant appealed against an order granting the anonymisation of the proceeedings.
Held: The critical question is whether there is sufficient general public interest in publishing a report of proceedings which identifies a party by name, . .
CitedZH (Tanzania) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 1-Feb-2011
The respondent had arrived and claimed asylum. Three claims were rejected, two of which were fraudulent. She had two children by a UK citizen, and if deported the result would be (the father being unsuitable) that the children would have to return . .
CitedETK v News Group Newspapers Ltd CA 19-Apr-2011
The claimant appealed against refusal of an injunction to restrain the defendant newspaper from publishing his name in connection with a forthcoming article. The claimant had had an affair with a co-worker. Both were married. The relationship ended, . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 01 May 2021; Ref: scu.472037

Regina v MacPherson: CACD 27 Jul 2005

The court considered the procedures to be followed for the giving of evidence by persons with reduced mental competence.
Rose LJ VP, Forbes, Calvert-Smith JJ
[2005] EWCA Crim 3605, [2006] 1 Cr App R 30, [2007] Crim LR 504
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedRegina v F CACD 14-Mar-2013
The crown sought leave to appeal against a terminating ruling. The defendant was accused of rape and sexual assault against his sister, profoundly deaf and with learning difficulties. The judge had found the victim to not be competent to give . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 27 April 2021; Ref: scu.468977

BA, Regina v: CACD 11 Jul 2012

Prosecution appeal against a terminating ruling relating to the ambit of s.80 of the 1984 Act which specifies the circumstances in which a wife may be compelled to give evidence against her husband.
[2012] 1 WLR 3378, [2012] 2 Cr App R 34, (2012) 176 JP 615, 2012] WLR(D) 199, [2012] EWCA Crim 1529
Bailii, WLRD
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 80
England and Wales

Updated: 15 April 2021; Ref: scu.462538

Kumari v Jalal: CA 15 Oct 1996

A second committal for the breach of a court order requires a new hearing and a new order. When a mandatory order is not complied with there is but a single breach.
Times 15-Oct-1996, [1997] 1 WLR 97
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedJones, Re (Alleged Contempt of Court) FD 21-Aug-2013
The Solicitor General sought the committal of the respondent for alleged contempt of court. There had been repeated litigation between the respondent and her former husband as to whether the children should live in Spain with the father or in Wales . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 April 2021; Ref: scu.82855

Williamson, Regina (on The Application of) v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court and Another: Admn 29 May 2012

The defendant appealed against fhis conviction, saying that his defence solicitor had been incompetent. In particular if certain video surveillance evidence had been properly examined it would have exonerated him.
Gross LJ, Burnett J
[2012] EWHC 1444 (Admin), [2012] Crim LR 975, [2012] 2 Cr App R 24
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 11 April 2021; Ref: scu.459879

Tuthill v The Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 15 Nov 2011

The defendant appealed against his conviction, saying that the evidence was obtained by means of an unlawful search by an officer.
Sir John Thomas P BD, Wyn Williams J
[2011] EWHC 3760 (Admin)
Bailii
Public Order Act 1986
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedMarshall v Crown Prosecution Service Admn 17-Jun-2015
A car was seen speeding. Husband and wife each said that they did not know who was driving it in response to notices requiring that information. Mrs M now appealed against her conviction under section 172. . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 11 April 2021; Ref: scu.459727

Regina v Turner (Paul): CA 11 Oct 1994

An application to exclude evidence for public interest immunity was to be recorded verbatim. The court emphasised the need to scrutinise, with great care, applications for disclosure of details about informers.
Times 11-Oct-1994, [1995] 1 WLR 264
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedRegina v H; Regina v C HL 5-Feb-2004
Use of Special Counsel as Last Resort Only
The accused faced charges of conspiring to supply Class A drugs. The prosecution had sought public interest immunity certificates. Special counsel had been appointed by the court to represent the defendants’ interests at the applications.
Updated: 09 April 2021; Ref: scu.88212

Regina v Ofori, Regina v Tackie: CA 17 Nov 1993

Court has power to grant bail or to release a person, pending their appeal despite the existence of a deportation order.
Times 17-Nov-1993, Gazette 08-Dec-1993, (1994) 99 Cr App R 223
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedRegina v Okolie CACD 16-Jun-2000
Evidence is always required on matters relating to foreign law, and such evidence given in person unless it was agreed or no issue was taken. Untranslated reports of stolen vehicles prepared by employees of the person who claimed to have been the . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 09 April 2021; Ref: scu.87485