The applicants sought judicial review of decisions to extend the custody time limits.
Held: Where a further extension is sought, it is in the public interest and the interests of justice that the court should confine its consideration under paragraph (b) to whether there has been due diligence and expedition in relation to matters giving rise to the need for the further extension, and ‘in the present case the application for a further extension was rightly foucsed on the correct question. This question was whether looking at the circumstances as a whole the delay on the part of the prosecution consitutes a lack of due diligence and expedition. ‘
Judges:
Laws LJ, Walker J
Citations:
[2006] EWHC 2138 (Admin), Times 11-Aug-2006
Links:
Statutes:
Prosecution of Offences Act 1985
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina (Gibson and Another) v Winchester Crown Court QBD 24-Feb-2004
The defendant challenged extension of the custody time limit, saying that the prosecuting authorities had not acted with due diligence to take the case forward.
Held: Though the prosecutor had not acted as required, in this case the actual . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Practice
Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.244506
