Yam, Regina v: CACD 28 Jan 2008

An order had been made for the trial of the defendant on a charge of murder to be held excluding both press and public. The Order had been made in the interests of national security and for the protection of the identity of a witness or other person.
Held: The order was upheld.
Lord Phillips CJ, Silber and Underhill JJ
[2008] EWCA Crim 269
Bailii
Criminal Procedure Rules 2005
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedA and Others, Regina v; Regina v The Crown Court at the Central Criminal Court ex parte A Times Newspapers Ltd etc CACD 13-Jan-2006
The defendant was to be charged with offences associated with terrorism. He had sought stay of the trial as an abuse of process saying that he had been tortured by English US and Pakistani authorities. The judge made an order as to what parts of the . .

Cited by:
See AlsoYam v Regina CACD 5-Oct-2010
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder saying that since part of the trial had been in camera the result was unsafe.
Held: The appeal failed. The Court addressed submissions advanced on his behalf indicating how substantially . .
See AlsoYam v Attorney General Misc 27-Feb-2014
Central Criminal Court . .
See AlsoYam, Regina (on The Application of) v Central Criminal Court and Another Admn 31-Oct-2014
The claimant had been convicted of murder after evidence was given in camera. He sought to apply to the ECHR challenging the fairness of the trial, arguing that he needed and shoudl be free to use the material given in camera.
Held: The . .
See AlsoWang Yam, Regina (on The Application of) v Central Criminal Court and Another SC 16-Dec-2015
The appellant was to apply to the ECHR challenge the fairness of his trial because it was held partially in camera. The UK resisted this application. The appellant sought to be permitted in his response to disclose and refer to contents of the . .
CitedWang Yam, Regina (on The Application of) v Central Criminal Court and Another SC 16-Dec-2015
The appellant was to apply to the ECHR challenge the fairness of his trial because it was held partially in camera. The UK resisted this application. The appellant sought to be permitted in his response to disclose and refer to contents of the . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 06 February 2021; Ref: scu.265921