ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

[2020] EWCA Civ 470
[2020] EWCA Civ 470
CA (Civ Div) (McCombe LJ, Peter Jackson LJ)
27 March 2020

A ticket tout’s appeal against a sentence of 21 weeks’ imprisonment for contempt of court was dismissed where sufficient credit had been applied for his guilty plea made at the door of the court, and the six-month starting point taken had been entirely appropriate given that the breach had been committed during the currency of a suspended sentence imposed for a similar breach of a High Court order.

[2020] EWCA Civ 448
[2020] EWCA Civ 448
CA (Civ Div) (McCombe LJ, King LJ, Holroyde LJ)
25 March 2020

A judge had not erred when relying on the guidance in C (A Minor) (Care Proceedings: Disclosure), Re [1997] Fam. 76 in ordering disclosure to the police of documents filed in care proceedings related to severe brain injuries suffered by a nine-week-old child.

[2020] NICA 19
[2020] NICA 19
CA (NI) (Stephens LJ, Treacy LJ, Keegan J)
23 March 2020

The Court of Appeal of Northern Ireland considered the current practice regarding the grant of legal aid in relation to applications before the Court of Appeal for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court.

[2020] UKSC 6
[2020] UKSC 6
SC (Lady Hale PSC, Lord Wilson JSC, Lord Carnwath JSC, Lord Lloyd-Jones JSC, Lord Sales JSC)
19 February 2020

The Supreme Court did not have jurisdiction to entertain appeals against a decision of the Divisional Court of Northern Ireland concerning the lawfulness of a life prisoner’s release on licence. The proceedings did not constitute a “criminal cause or matter” for the purposes of the Judicature (Northern Ireland) Act 1978 s.41(1); the proper avenue of appeal was to the Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland.

DC (Dingemans LJ, Farbey J)
19 February 2020

It was in the public interest to bring committal proceedings against a former legal clerk who had made audio recordings of five sets of criminal proceedings in the Crown Court to assist with his note-taking, in contempt of court. The contempts were admitted, and taking into account all the relevant factors including his ill health, he was sentenced to four weeks’ imprisonment, suspended for 12 months.

DC (Leggatt LJ, May J)
5 February 2020

A 61-year-old man who had posted on his Facebook page photographs purporting to be of the convicted murderers Jon Venables and Robert Thompson, in breach of a worldwide injunction prohibiting the publication of their identity, was given a sentence of four months’ imprisonment suspended for two years.

[2019] EWCA Civ 1841
[2019] EWCA Civ 1841
CA (Civ Div) (Underhill LJ, Simler LJ)
31 October 2019

The High Court’s decision refusing permission to apply for judicial review in proceedings relating to a murder conviction was “a judgment…in a criminal cause or matter” within the meaning of the Senior Courts Act 1981 s.18(1)(a), restricting the Court of Appeal’s jurisdiction to consider the appeal. There was no basis for concluding that the denial of a right of appeal in those circumstances amounted to an unjustified denial of the appellant’s right of access to justice.

[2019] EWCA Crim 1568
[2019] EWCA Crim 1568
CA (Crim Div) (Lord Burnett LCJ, Warby J, Edis J)
17 September 2019

A challenge, by way of judicial review, by a young offender convicted of the murder and rape of a 14-year-old girl, to an excepting direction which discharged a reporting restriction order imposed under the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 s.45(3), was refused.

CA (Civ Div) (Floyd LJ, Green LJ)
11 September 2019

In refusing a writ of habeas corpus for a prisoner’s release from detention, the Court of Appeal held, applying Corke, Re [1954] 1 W.L.R. 899, that where a person had been convicted by a competent court of summary jurisdiction, the appropriate remedy was to appeal against conviction and not by way of application for habeas corpus.

[2019] EWCA Crim 1533
[2019] EWCA Crim 1533
CA (Crim Div) (Simon LJ, Jeremy Baker J, Freedman J)
28 August 2019

The Court of Appeal considered the consequences of its earlier decision to quash an appellant’s conviction for causing criminal damage when that offence had not fallen under its jurisdiction in the Criminal Appeal Act 1968 s.1. It withdrew part of its earlier decision and deployed an unusual route to impose an absolute discharge on the appellant instead.

Scroll to top