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.

Citations:

[1971] UKPC 25, [1971] 3 WLR 718, [1971] 3 All ER 76, [1972] AC 100

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 20 December 2022; Ref: scu.444466

Birse v HM Advocate: HCJ 28 Jun 2000

Where a magistrate had heard a proper description of the reasons for granting a search warrant, it was not an abuse of the suspect’s human rights to execute it, even though he had not had chance to make any representations about the search. The right to an effective remedy was not to be enshrined in UK law, and this came close to such a claim.

Citations:

Times 28-Jun-2000

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Human Rights, Criminal Practice

Updated: 12 December 2022; Ref: scu.78422

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).’

Judges:

Sir Thomas Bingham MR, Sir Peter Gibson LJ, Sir Michael Mann

Citations:

Gazette 08-Mar-1995, Times 03-Feb-1995, Independent 02-Feb-1995, [1995] 1 WLR 576

Statutes:

Bail Act 1946 3, Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 128

Jurisdiction:

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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.86313

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’

Judges:

Hall CJ

Citations:

[1958] 26 WWR 685

Jurisdiction:

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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.199969

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.

Judges:

Lord Taylor CJ

Citations:

Gazette 07-Apr-1993, Independent 15-Apr-1993, [1993] 97 Cr App R 134, [1993] 1 WLR 471

Jurisdiction:

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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.88223

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.’

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill CJ

Citations:

[1999] 3 All ER 498, [2000] 1 Cr App R 141

Statutes:

Criminal Appeal Act 1995 9

Jurisdiction:

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. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.237576

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.’

Judges:

Kennedy LJ

Citations:

Times 23-Nov-2000

Jurisdiction:

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. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 07 December 2022; Ref: scu.77963

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.

Citations:

Times 27-Apr-1993, Independent 11-Jun-1993

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1967 4, Criminal Justice Act 1991 34

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Prisons, Criminal Practice

Updated: 01 December 2022; 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.

Judges:

Lord Justice Auld and Mr Justice Gage

Citations:

Times 04-Jun-2002, [2002] EWHC 919 (Admin), [2002] 2 Cr App R 40, [2002] 1 WLR 3073

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Crime and Disorder Act 1998 51

Jurisdiction:

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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Magistrates, Criminal Practice

Updated: 20 November 2022; 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.

Citations:

Times 18-May-1998, Times 18-May-1998, Gazette 10-Jun-1998

Statutes:

Magistrates Courts Act 1980 15

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Magistrates, Criminal Practice

Updated: 18 November 2022; 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.

Judges:

Picthford lJ, Kenneth Parker J

Citations:

[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

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

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, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Media, Human Rights

Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.472037

Pham v The District Court for The Southern District of New York: Admn 13 Dec 2012

Application for bail in extradition proceedings made pursuant to section 1A of the Criminal Justice Act 1967, inserted by amendments made to the Police and Justice Act 2006.

Judges:

Blake J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 3890 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Extradition, Criminal Practice

Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.471271

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.

Judges:

Rose LJ VP, Forbes, Calvert-Smith JJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Crim 3605, [2006] 1 Cr App R 30, [2007] Crim LR 504

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 12 November 2022; 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.

Citations:

[2012] 1 WLR 3378, [2012] 2 Cr App R 34, (2012) 176 JP 615, 2012] WLR(D) 199, [2012] EWCA Crim 1529

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 80

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice

Updated: 03 November 2022; 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.

Citations:

Times 15-Oct-1996, [1997] 1 WLR 97

Jurisdiction:

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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 31 October 2022; 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.

Judges:

Gross LJ, Burnett J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 1444 (Admin), [2012] Crim LR 975, [2012] 2 Cr App R 24

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice

Updated: 31 October 2022; 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.

Judges:

Sir John Thomas P BD, Wyn Williams J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 3760 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Public Order Act 1986

Jurisdiction:

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. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Police

Updated: 31 October 2022; Ref: scu.459727

In Re F (A Minor) (Criminal Proceedings): CA 12 Dec 1994

A father’s defence solicitor was entitled to interview children as witnesses of an alleged assault on the mother.

Citations:

Times 12-Dec-1994, Ind Summary 16-Jan-1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice, Children, Criminal Evidence

Updated: 27 October 2022; Ref: scu.81876

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.

Citations:

Times 11-Oct-1994, [1995] 1 WLR 264

Jurisdiction:

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.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 26 October 2022; 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.

Citations:

Times 17-Nov-1993, Gazette 08-Dec-1993, (1994) 99 Cr App R 223

Jurisdiction:

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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Immigration

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.87485

Regina v Less: CA 30 Mar 1993

There was disquiet over a jurors’ discussion with the defendant after a trial.
Held: No enquiry was proper.

Citations:

Times 30-Mar-1993

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Young (Stephen) CACD 30-Dec-1994
Jury Consulting Ouija Board – Serious Irregularity
It had been suggested that during their overnight stay in a hotel after retiring to consider their verdict, some of the jurors had consultated an ouija board to consult with the deceased, and to ask him who had been his killer. Having believed that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.87178

Regina v Martinez-Tobon: CA 30 Nov 1993

Guidance was given to judges about commenting to juries with regard to silent defendants.
Held: A judge could be right to comment where the defendant remained silent whilst relying on facts within his own knowledge.

Citations:

Gazette 02-Feb-1994, Times 01-Dec-1993, Independent 30-Nov-1993

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.87289

Regina v Arif: CA 17 Jun 1993

Pre-trial discussion of evidence by potential witnesses is to be to be discouraged.

Citations:

Times 17-Jun-1993

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Momodou and Limani CACD 2-Feb-2005
The defendants appealed against their convictions and sentence for violent disorder and assault during an uprising at Yarl’s Wood Detention centre. It was said that witnesses had been coached, other defence witnesses had been returned to their . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.86058

Re Arrows Ltd (No 4): CA 8 Apr 1993

A Civil Court cannot stop the Serious Fraud Office using evidence which had been gathered under compulsion during Insolvency interviews under s236. Any element of confidentiality was overriden.

Citations:

Independent 08-Apr-1993, Gazette 09-Jun-1993

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1987 2(8) 3, Insolvency Act 1986 236

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromRe Arrows Ltd (In Liquidation) Chd 1-Jul-1992
Liquidators seeking information from directors were allowed to undertake not to disclose any information gathered to the Serious Fraud Office. Such an undertaking having been given a former company director was not able to refuse to answer questions . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromRe Arrows Ltd No 4 HL 1995
The Court of Appeal had allowed an appeal from the judge who had directed that the transcripts of examinations of a director of an insolvent company under section 236 on the Director of the Serious Fraud Office undertaking that the transcripts would . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Company

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.85711

Regina v Mahdi: CACD 15 Mar 1993

There had been delay in the prosecution. Eventually, the prosecutor sought another adjournment before Judge Clarkson, who said ‘it is to be recorded that this is the last time that there will be an adjournment for the benefit of the prosecution.’ He wrote: ‘I indicated to parties no further adjournment would be granted to the prosecution and that the case must be ready at the resumed hearing or else.’ It came back to court but the prosecutor was still not ready. Sich J then said: ‘I am afraid that I see no alternative but to implement the clear intention of Judge Clarkson of 27th August. I therefore invite the prosecution to consider their position very carefully, and in the light of that I think the only proper course for them is to offer no evidence on this indictment. If they choose not to do that, then I think the defence will have to apply for a stay of proceedings on the grounds of abuse of process.’ The matter came back yet again, and when the judge said it should proceed unless the defendant could demonstrate prejudice. The defendant appealed.
Held: The conviction was quashed. Lord Taylor CJ said: ‘We have considered the circumstances of this case with some anxiety. We have been referred to the well-known authorities on the issue of abuse of process. In our judgment this case does not come within the scope of those authorities. Nevertheless, we feel that in the very special and exceptional circumstances of this case the submission made by Mr Akinjide ought to be upheld. We consider that had the Assistant Recorder been fully and properly informed of the course which had been taken before by two senior judges he would in all probability have followed the course which each of those learned judges indicated they would have followed had the matter come back before them.
We are not, in saying this, seeking to establish any precedent, nor do we seek to bring this particular case within any general principle in regard to abuse of process. We simply find that in the exceptional circumstances of this case an injustice was inadvertantly done to this appellant by reason of the lack of accurate information placed before the Assistant Recorder.’

Judges:

Lord Taylor CJ and Pill and Sedley JJ

Citations:

[1993] Crim LR 793

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

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 . .
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.441558

Regina v Rose: CACD 17 Feb 1993

A judge must follow the Regina v Dickens guidelines when making a drugs confiscation order. Alliott J said: ‘We agree that if admissible evidence satisfies a judge so that he is sure that any given sum is a benefit, then there is no need for him to proceed by way of section 2(2) at all.’

Judges:

Alliott J

Citations:

Gazette 17-Feb-1993, (1993) 97 Cr App R 253

Statutes:

Drug Trafficking Offences Act 1986 2(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v Dickens CACD 11-Apr-1990
The defendant had been convicted of conspiring to import cannabis, and made subject inter alia to a confiscation order.
Held: ‘ the object of the Act is to ensure, so far as is possible, that the convicted drug trafficker is parted from the . .

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Levin CACD 29-Jan-2004
The defendant appealed against a confiscation order, challenging the standard of proof applied by the judge.
Held: The judge was entitled to include in his consideration, the evidence given at the trial as well as that on the confiscation . .
CitedSilcock and Another, Regina v CACD 29-Jan-2004
The defendants had been found guilty of conspiracy to deliver counterfeit notes. They now appealed against sentence and confiscation orders. The notes were high quality and denomination dollar notes, with probable total face values of many millions. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.88598

Appeal Under S 3(c) of Costs In Criminal Cases (General Amendment) Regulations of 1991 Against a Wasted Costs Order Re: Lakha and Boothby Wasted Costs Order 5/97: CACD 6 Nov 1998

Citations:

[1998] EWCA Crim 3148

Statutes:

Costs In Criminal Cases (General) (Amendment) Regulations 1991 3(c)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice, Costs, Legal Professions

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.156022

Regina v Cox; Regina v Thomas: CACD 4 Feb 1999

Where a defendant had been allowed to appeal on some grounds, but refused on others, the appellant could only renew the refused grounds with leave of the Appeal Court, and after giving notice of his intention to the court and to the Crown.

Citations:

Times 04-Feb-1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.88425

Regina v Aspinall: CACD 4 Feb 1999

A known schizophrenic even though certified probably fit for interview should nevertheless have present with him in interview at a police station an appropriate adult. Assessment of such an individual is beyond the skills of a custody sergeant.

Citations:

Gazette 17-Feb-1999, Times 04-Feb-1999, [1999] EWCA Crim 185

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice, Crime

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.88372

Regina v Ward (Judith): CACD 15 Jul 1992

The defendant had been wrongly convicted of IRA bombings. She said that the prosecution had failed to disclose evidence.
Held: The prosecution’s forensic scientists are under a common law duty to disclose to the defence anything they may discover which may assist the defendant. ‘Non-disclosure is a potent source of injustice and even with the benefit of hindsight, it will often be difficult to say whether or not an undisclosed item of evidence might have shifted the balance or opened up a new line of defence.’
It was wrong to limit what was to be disclosed to merely what was relevant: ‘An incident of a defendant’s right to a fair trial is a right to timely disclosure by the prosecution of all material matters which affect the scientific case relied on by the prosecution, that is, whether such matters strengthen or weaken the prosecution case or assist the defence case. This duty exists whether or not a specific request for disclosure of details of scientific evidence is made by the defence. Moreover, this duty is continuous: it applies not only in the pre-trial period but also throughout the trial’ and ‘We would emphasise that ‘all relevant evidence of help to the accused’ is not limited to evidence which will obviously advance the accused’s case. It is of help to the accused to have the opportunity of considering all the material evidence which the prosecution have gathered, and from which the prosecution have made their own selection of evidence to be led.’
As to the statement in Hennessy: ‘That statement reflects the position in 1974 no less than today. We would emphasise that ‘all relevant evidence of help to the accused’ is not limited to evidence which will obviously advance the accused’s case. It is of help to the accused to have the opportunity of considering all the material evidence which the prosecution have gathered, and from which the prosecution have made their own selection of evidence to be led. We believe that in practice the importance of disclosing unused material has been much more clearly recognised by prosecutors since the publication of the Attorney-General’s guidelines. The current Code of Conduct of the Bar (1991), Annexe H, ‘Written Standards for the Conduct of Professional work, Standards Applicable to Criminal Cases,’ para. 1.2, reflecting the words of Lawton L.J. which we have quoted, provides:
‘Prosecuting counsel should bear in mind at all times whilst he is instructed that he is responsible for the presentation and general conduct of the case and that it is his duty to ensure that all relevant evidence is either presented by the prosecution or made available to the defence.”

Judges:

Glidewell LJ

Citations:

Gazette 15-Jul-1992, [1993] 1 WLR 619, (1993) 96 Cr App Rep 1

Statutes:

Criminal Appeal Act 1968 2(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v Hennessy (Timothy) 1978
The court described the duty on a prosecutor to disclose evidence: ‘those who prepare and conduct prosecutions owe a duty to the courts to ensure that all relevant evidence of help to an accused is either led by them or made available to the . .
ApprovedRegina v Hennessey (Timothy) CACD 1978
The court considered the obligations of the prosecution on disclosure. The courts must: ‘keep in mind that those who prepare and conduct prosecutions owe a duty to the courts to ensure that all relevant evidence of help to an accused is either led . .

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.
CitedRegina v Keane CACD 15-Mar-1994
Public Interest Immunity Certificates for the protection of informants must be used only carefully. The Crown must specify the purpose of the public interest immunity certificate. The principles on disclosure in Ward are not limited to scientific . .
CitedRegina v Davis; Regina v Rowe; Regina v Johnson CA 10-Mar-1993
Guidance was given on the procedures to be followed for applications for non-disclosure for public interest immunity. The court identified three types of case. In the first, and most frequent case the prosecution must notify the defence of the . .
CitedRegina v Brown (Winston) HL 20-Feb-1997
The victim had been stabbed outside a nightclub. Two witnesses identified the defendant. The defendants complained that evidence had not been disclosed to them.
Held: There is no duty at common law on the prosecution to warn the defence of . .
CitedTaylor and Others v Director of The Serious Fraud Office and Others HL 29-Oct-1998
The defendant had requested the Isle of Man authorities to investigate the part if any taken by the plaintiff in a major fraud. No charges were brought against the plaintiff, but the documents showing suspicion came to be disclosed in the later . .
CitedTaylor and Others v Director of The Serious Fraud Office and Others HL 29-Oct-1998
The defendant had requested the Isle of Man authorities to investigate the part if any taken by the plaintiff in a major fraud. No charges were brought against the plaintiff, but the documents showing suspicion came to be disclosed in the later . .
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 . .
CitedRegina v Mills, Regina v Poole HL 24-Jul-1997
The prosecution have a duty to disclose to the defence the statement of an adverse witness and not just to provide the name and address, even though that person was not seen as credible witness by the prosecution. ‘the rule in Bryant and Dickson is . .
CitedRegina v Alibhai and Others CACD 30-Mar-2004
The defendants appealed against their convictions for conspiracy to manufacture and distribute counterfeit Microsoft products. They said that inadequate disclosure had been provided by Microsoft. The principal witness was a participating informant . .
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 . .
CitedMielll, Regina v CACD 21-Dec-2007
The prosecutor appealed from the acquittal of the defendant on a charge of murder. He had subsequently been said to have admitted to the offence while in prison on other offences.
Held: The confessions did amount to new evidence within the . .
CitedSecretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills v Doffman and Another ChD 11-Oct-2010
The defendants applied for directors’ disqualification proceedings for the claim to be struck out or dismissed on the ground that the respondent had breached their rights to a fair trial under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights . .
CitedNunn v Suffolk Constabulary and Another Admn 4-May-2012
The claimant had been convicted of murder and his appeal had failed. He now sought disclosure of the forensic material held by the police to his own legal team.
Held: Permission to apply for review was granted, but the claim failed. ‘It is . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.88257

Regina v Wren: CACD 13 Jul 1993

The defendant was accused of indecent assault. He said that the complainant had consented.
Held: It was necessary for the jury to consider whether the appellant might honestly have believed that the complainant was consenting because that was an issue that arose from the facts. The judge has a duty to direct the jury on each issue to be considered by them, and to clear up the slightest doubts about issues before the closing speeches.

Citations:

Times 13-Jul-1993, Ind Summary 09-Aug-1993, [1993] CLR 952

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedH, Regina v CACD 25-Apr-2006
The defendant youth appealed his conviction and sentence for rape by oral penetration of a six or seven year old boy. He complained that the evidence contained such inconsistences that the case should not have proceeded. Complaint was also made that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence, Criminal Practice

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.88351

Regina v Burley: CACD 16 Dec 1994

A solicitor’s responsibility for the delay in filing a notice of appeal is not a sufficient reason to extend the time to make the appeal. If things were otherwise the solicitor could always excuse his own default pleading that the defendant should not be prejudiced.

Citations:

Gazette 16-Dec-1994

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.88398

Regina v Toney: CACD 10 Mar 1999

Counsel advising on an appeal against sentence, should make full allowance for the possibility that lodging an appeal may act to extend the time served, and delay the release from prison by disapplying advantageous early release provisions.

Citations:

Gazette 10-Mar-1999

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1990 34A

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.88197

Regina v Zoppola-Barraza: CACD 6 May 1994

The appellant had been convicted of importing cocaine. He had no previous convictions. However, he gave evidence that he had been smuggling gold and jewels into the UK so as to avoid duty and VAT. The Recorder directed the jury to have regard to the good character of the appellant to the extent that it was relevant to his credibility. She declined to give the propensity limb of the good character direction.
Held: The appeal failed. A good character direction was inappropriate where the defendant had told the jury of his criminal acts. The admitted misconduct was so closely related to the criminality now alleged against him that it would have been an affront to common sense to hold that the appellant was entitled to the propensity limb of the direction.

Citations:

Times 06-May-1994, [1994] Crim LR 83

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.88366

Regina v Soames-Waring: CACD 20 Jul 1998

The judge had discharged his duty properly to direct the jury as to the defendant’s case where, the defendant not having given evidence but having been interviewed at length, he referred the jury to the relevant parts of the interview summaries by page numbers.

Citations:

Times 20-Jul-1998

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.88062

Regina v T; Regina v K: CACD 22 Mar 2001

All cases against children should be tried in the Youth Court, and not transferred to the Crown Court save for the most grave offences. In this case, the allegations included one of common assault. The appeal court had no power on this occasion to set aside the transfer, but since the accusation of common assault was only triable summarily, the indictment as a whole was invalid and was quashed.

Citations:

Gazette 22-Mar-2001, Times 11-Jan-2001

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1991 53 (4)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.88144

Regina v Taylor (Gary): CACD 17 Aug 1994

The defendant’s fundamental right to know the identity of his accusers and witnesses giving evidence against him, was to be denied only in exceptional circumstances. It is a matter for the Judge’s discretion.

Citations:

Ind Summary 12-Sep-1994, Times 17-Aug-1994

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.88156

Regina v Okafor: CACD 10 Nov 1993

The appellant, a Nigerian national, arrived at Gatwick Airport from Nigeria with a single item of luggage, namely a suit carrier. He was asked a number of questions, in particular whether he had packed the luggage himself and whether everything in it belonged to him, following which his luggage was searched. Packages of cocaine were discovered in his luggage but he was not arrested or informed of what had been found, the officer wishing him to be released in order to see whether he would lead customs officers to anybody else involved in the importation. He agreed to undergo a body search. Whilst this was in progress (and other officers being deployed by way of surveillance) he was asked various questions and gave various answers without being cautioned or advised of his entitlement to have legal advice before being interviewed. Objection was taken at trial to the admission in evidence of the conversation during the body search.
Held: Customs officers are subject to the PACE Code of Practice for Detention etc in the same as are the police, and must issue a formal caution before questioning a suspect. ‘We have come to the conclusion that the learned judge ought to have excluded this conversation. There were clear breaches of the rules and breaches which were of significance in the context of this case. Therefore we conclude, because it seems that this matter has been ventilated by Mr Issard-Davies with a view to future conduct by the Customs and Excise, that where a Customs Officer has reason to suspect that an offence has been committed, he must either avoid asking questions in relation to the offence, or he must follow the provisions of the Code and administer a caution. In the circumstances of the present case it would have been an option for the Customs Officer to talk about anything other than the case whilst conducting the search, and to have allowed the suspect to go into the concourse and then ask him questions only when he was ultimately arrested. In that way the object of trying to catch others who might be waiting to meet the suspect could have been pursued.’

Judges:

Lord Taylor CJ

Citations:

Gazette 24-Nov-1993, Ind Summary 22-Nov-1993, Times 10-Nov-1993, (1994) 99 Cr App Rep 97, [1994] 3 All ER 741

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 Code C s66

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Sewa Singh Gill and Paramjit Singh Gill CACD 31-Jul-2003
The appellants sought to challenge their convictions for cheating the Inland Revenue. They were accused of having hidden assets and income from the revenue. The appellants objected to the use at trial of material obtained in a ‘Hansard’ interview. . .
CitedRegina v Dianne Senior and Samantha Senior CA 4-Mar-2004
The defendants appealed convictions for being involved in the illegal importation of cocaine, saying that questioning at the airport before a caution was administered was unlawful. By the time they were asked about the cases, the customs officers . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Customs and Excise

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.87490

Regina v McAndrew-Bingham: CACD 28 Dec 1998

The offence of attempted child-abduction is an offence of assault or threat of injury, and so the evidence in chief of the child complainant could be given by video recording, and any cross examination be done by live television link.

Citations:

Gazette 03-Feb-1999, Times 28-Dec-1998

Statutes:

Child Abduction Act 1984 2, Criminal Justice Act 1988 32(2)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice, Evidence

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.87302

Regina v Kemp: CACD 25 Apr 1994

A judge should do no more than intimate that the jury has right to stop a trial.

Citations:

Times 25-Apr-1994, [1995] 1 Cr App R 151

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina v SH CACD 3-Aug-2010
The prosecutor had appealed immediately against the judge’s withdrawal of a charge of racially aggravated use of insulting words or behaviour. The judge then ignored his obligation to continue the trial without mentioning the issue to the jury. He . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.87051

Regina v Maxwell: CACD 11 May 1994

When directing the jury, the judge should mention all alternative and appropriate lesser offences with explanations. The possibility of a conviction under section 47 for assault occasioning actual bodily harm should be offered to a conviction under section 20 for wounding.
Hobhouse LJ said: ‘We consider that, in a case such as this, where there is a factual situation which requires a jury to consider the extent of the joint enterprise and whether all the ingredients of the offence have been proved against one of the defendants, and the fact that the evidence was capable of showing that different offences may have been committed by him, the jury should have that opportunity to consider the alternatives. This is not a case, such as often occurs, where there is a single main clear count charging an offence, and the alternatives to it are not viable alternatives. This is a case where the alternatives were, on the evidence before the jury, clearly viable as regards the appellant . .
The present case undoubtedly involved disgraceful conduct on the part of this appellant. He had been identified as one of the men in the minicab. It was clear and undisputed on the evidence that he had taken part in a joint attack on the minicab driver in the early hours of the morning and had, on any view, inflicted some injuries upon him. Indeed, on one view, he was the person who had started the actual violence. It was disgraceful conduct, and it would cause outrage if the appellant, having been identified as one of the men involved, were to ‘get clean away’. If the jury were to have a proper opportunity to consider all the alternatives which were open to them in respect of the appellant, they should have had further directions from the Judge upon the alternative verdicts that were open to them. The Judge laid the ground in his directions about what was involved in a joint enterprise, and the different views that might be taken of how far the joint enterprise went. He referred to the facts, which indicated the increased gravity of the later parts of the incident, and the role of Oakley in aggravating the assault, as well as being involved in the robbery. But he did not then go on to direct the jury that there were alternative verdicts which were open to them.
In our judgment, that did amount to a material irregularity in the conduct of this trial, and makes the appellant’s conviction unsafe.’

Judges:

Hobhouse LJ, Garland and Curtis JJ

Citations:

Times 11-May-1994, [1994] Crim LR 848

Statutes:

Offences against the Person Act 1861 18

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

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 . .

Cited by:

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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.87298

Regina v K (DT): CACD 25 Nov 1992

The Judge must himself examine documents for which immunity is claimed before making a decision on a public interest immunity claim. It is the court’s job, and nobody else’s to make such decisions, and to find the balance between the public interest and the right to a fair trial in any particular case.

Judges:

Lord Taylor of Gosforth LCJ, Potts J, Judge J

Citations:

Times 08-Dec-1992

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice, Natural Justice

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.87027

Regina v Goodway: CACD 11 Aug 1993

The judge is to give a ‘Lucas’ direction, if the fact of a defendant’s lie is to be relied upon by the prosecution to challenge the veracity of other evidence given by the defendant.

Citations:

Gazette 13-Oct-1993, Independent 27-Aug-1993, Times 11-Aug-1993, [1993] 98 Cr App R 11

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedPhilip Joshua Rahming v The Queen PC 20-May-2002
(Bahamas) The case was an appeal against a conviction for murder on the basis of the incorrect direction from the judge as to manslaughter and murder, and the failure to give a lies direction.
Held: The failure to bring the defendant before a . .
CitedRegina v Burge and Pegg CACD 1996
The court considered the circumstances under which the defendant had lied, and Lucas direction was to be given: ‘As there seems to be at the moment a tendency in one appeal after another to assert that there has been no direction, or an inadequate . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.86710

Regina v Gough: CACD 2 Jun 1992

A juror had lived next door to a party to the burglary alleged against the defendant. The defendant alleged bias. The juror said she had been unaware of the connection.
Held: The question of whether there had been bias in a jury trial is whether there had been a real danger’ of bias, rather than the ‘Topping’ test. ‘Mr Hytner submits, applying that test, that the fair-minded observer would suspect in the present case that a fair trial was not possible. In this case Mrs Smith in her affidavit evidence has stated that she was unaware of the relevant facts connecting her to the appellant until after the jury had delivered its verdict. This evidence was unchallenged. Accordingly this can be distinguished from the various authorities which have been cited to us in that in these latter cases the relevant `connecting’ facts giving rise to the alleged bias have already been known to the particular member of the tribunal, against whom bias has been raised, throughout the trial in question. This did not apply in the present case. If the fact that Mrs Smith was not aware of the relevant facts connecting her to the appellant had been known to the fair-minded observer, then surely the observer would, in those circumstances, have regarded the trial as having been a fair one. Should we impute knowledge of Mrs Smith’s particular state of mind to the fair-minded observer? Mr Hytner submits that such an observer would be bound to conclude that Mrs Smith must have realised who the case concerned when she heard the address referred to in the statement and also when she saw David Gough’s photograph. Her claim of ignorance would be unacceptable to a fair-minded observer. We think there is force in this contention. Accordingly we do not seek to distinguish the instant case by imputing to the fair-minded observer actual knowledge of Mrs Smith’s unawareness of the relevant facts until after the verdict had been delivered.’

Citations:

Gazette 08-Jul-1992

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromRegina v Gough (Robert) HL 1993
The defendant had been convicted of robbery. He appealed, saying that a member of the jury was a neighbour to his brother, and there was therefore a risk of bias. This was of particular significance as the defendant was charged with conspiracy with . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.86718