The areas of work in which we have particular expertise, experience and excellence
The areas of work in which we have particular expertise, experience and excellence
A defendant had pleaded guilty to four counts which were defective in law and this only came to light over two years later. Three were substituted for new offences under Section 3A Criminal Appeal Act…
The trial judge had been entitled in the circumstances of the case to make findings of fact that the defendant would have reduced the purity of the cocaine in his possession and then sold it….
Where, at the Magistrates’ Court, a defendant indicated a guilty plea to an either-way offence, but that offence was subsequently sent to the Crown Court under section 51(3) Crime and Disorder Act 1998, rather than…
The trial judge, construing an application to admit evidence that a child complainant had lied about their sexual activities as one that involved both bad character and section 41 of the Youth Justice and Criminal…
“suspicion” that property is stolen does not fulfil the mens rea of an attempt to conceal, disguise or convert criminal property – even though it satisfies that for the substantive offence. The appellants worked…
The High Court upheld a decision to admit confession evidence which was the sole evidence relied upon by the Crown. This case particularly focuses on the requirement to advise a detainee of their right to…
when a defendant voluntarily absents himself from his trial, but is later produced, the court should not simply force him to “re-join” the trial at the stage it has reached, but should consider recalling witnesses…
The High Court uphold a decision to hear an appeal with one lay magistrate to avoid ‘unreasonable delay’ The claimant was convicted of using racially aggravated, threatening or abusive words or behaviour, contrary to…
If a judge accepts that a defendant is unfit for the trial process, and his mental impairment has not changed from the time of his interview, then his interview should not be admitted as evidence,…
A technical error in the indictment, namely reference to the wrong statute, did not render the conviction unsafe as no prejudice had been caused. In addition, it was wrong for the trial judge, anticipating that…
Enter your email address below to sign up and receive updates from our news, articles and cases.
For help and advice talk to a member of our clerking team. They can advise on the best options for your matter.
Call: +44 (0) 20 7353 3102
