The defendant faced road traffic summonses. On the last working day before the defendant’s trial the prosecution applied for an adjournment because two of their witnesses were unavailable. The application was refused. On the first day of the trial the prosecution repeated its application and this time it was successful.
Held: The magistrates had been in error in granting the adjournment since there was no change of circumstances. The magistrates had other ways of accepting the evidence. The matter should proceed subject to a prohibition on the admission of oral evidence from the two missing witnesses.
Judges:
Sedley LJ, Mitting J
Citations:
[2005] EWHC 905 (Admin)
Links:
Cited by:
Cited – Jones v South East Surrey Local Justice Area Admn 12-Mar-2010
The defendant sought judicial review of a decision of the magistrates to adjourn a case where, on the day before, a differently constitued bench had refused an adjournment requested by the prosecution. On the first occasion the prosecutor had not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Magistrates, Criminal Practice
Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.225188
