We regularly review cases and comment on those we find may be of interest. Below you will find our latest case updates.
Advocates should be more vigilant when conducting sentencing exercises in the Crown Court, especially specially when considering summary only offences.
Goods authorised by the trademark holder for manufacture but not for sale fell within section 92(1) of the trade Marks Act 1994
Consideration of the proper requirements for the rebuttal of the common law presumption of doli incapax when a defendant is being treated as below the age of 14.
Consideration of the scope of the words “or otherwise” under section 5(6) of the Domestic Violence, Crimes and Victims Act 2004
The Court of Appeal decided that it was in the public interest to remove the reporting restrictions in a case involving two 15-year olds who were convicted of murder. There are other points in this appeal, but this note focuses just on the reporting restriction issue.
The partial defence of diminished responsibility can still be relied upon by someone suffering a recognised medical illness who is voluntarily intoxicated, but only if the criteria in section 2(1) of the Homicide Act 1957 are met.
Consideration of the principles to be applied to a defective indictment.
A judge is not entitled to proceed with a trial after the death of a defendant and verdicts returned in such circumstances are a nullity
Self-defence can be a defence to dangerous driving, in rare circumstances
The Court of Appeal considers the appropriate sentencing reduction for extreme old age.
There is no legal or evidential principle which states that a jury cannot consider a case which depends solely on DNA evidence left on an object by a defendant at a crime scene.
It is not inappropriate to have a confiscation order run alongside a repayment arrangement. Issues around the sale of a family home are primarily for the enforcement stage.
The amount of costs a defendant is ordered to pay after conviction should properly take into account the defendant’s acquittal on at least one count and their limited means and ability to pay any amount of costs ordered.
Consideration of trial in absence for a defendant who suffered a drug induced psychosis mid-trial.
Consideration of the meaning of “substantially impaired” in diminished responsibility cases.
A jury does not need to be satisfied of the truth of each incident when considering propensity; they should consider on all the prosecution evidence if they are satisfied that there is propensity.
< Previous [1 of 8] Next >
At every stage in our history we have championed equal opportunities. We have also earned a reputation for excellence, whether defending or prosecuting and many of our former members have gone on to be Judges and even a Judge Advocate General.