CA (Crim Div) (Leggatt LJ, Nicol J, Butcher J)
27 June 2019
The court considered the principles applicable where the prosecution called a witness but only considered part of their evidence worthy of belief, and wished to adduce other evidence to contradict the part that it considered inaccurate or false, without applying to have the witness declared hostile.
CA (Crim Div) (Hallett LJ, Warby J, Picken J)
18 June 2019
There was a powerful case that the appellant was a party to a joint enterprise in which he had personally intended that grievous bodily harm would be inflicted on the victim. There was a proper basis on which to conclude that the jury’s verdict that he was guilty of murder would not have differed notwithstanding the change in the law of joint enterprise following R. v Jogee (Ameen Hassan)  UKSC 8.
CA (Crim Div) (Simon LJ, Picken J, Swift J)
13 June 2019
A trial judge had been entitled to admit bad character evidence following a Criminal Justice Act 2003 s.101(1)(e) application by an accused’s co-defendant, as going towards the accused’s propensity to tell the truth, despite having refused the prosecution’s s.101(1)(d) application to admit the same bad character evidence due to its weaknesses.
SC (Lord Reed DPSC, Lord Kerr JSC, Lady Black JSC, Lord Lloyd-Jones JSC, Lord Sales JSC)
6 June 2019
The court interpreted condition 4, set out in the Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Act 2007 s.1(6), which allowed the Director of Public Prosecutions for Northern Ireland to issue a certificate directing that a trial should be conducted without a jury if he suspected that an offence had been committed as a result of, in connection with or in response to religious or political hostility of one person or group of persons towards another person or group of persons. The condition could be relied upon in respect of a member of the armed forces who shot a person whom he suspected of being a member of the IRA.
CA (Crim Div) (Sir Brian Leveson PQBD, Cutts J, Sir Peter Openshaw)
5 June 2019
A whole-life order was justified in the case of man who had been convicted of two counts of murder after carrying out two contract killings which involved substantial planning.
QBD (Admin) (Simon LJ, Farbey J)
10 May 2019
The Criminal Cases Review Commission’s refusal to refer a murder conviction to the Court of Appeal in the light of fresh evidence was not unreasonable or unlawful. Even if that evidence had been accepted, there was no real possibility that the Court of Appeal would quash the conviction. The court stated obiter that the commission should be given an opportunity to make representations at an oral hearing before permission was given to bring judicial review proceedings against it.
DC (Irwin LJ, Jay J)
8 May 2019
A fresh inquest was ordered under the Coroners Act 1988 s.13(1)(b) into the death of a 14-year-old child in 1966, as new evidence was available which rendered a further inquest necessary and desirable in the interests of justice.
CA (Crim Div) (Holroyde LJ, Butcher J, Farbey J)
17 April 2019
The court gave guidance on the proper approach to an application to the Crown Court for a witness summons under the Criminal Procedure (Attendance of Witnesses) Act 1965 s.2.
CA (Crim Div) (Haddon-Cave LJ, Goss J, Judge Kinch QC)
16 April 2019
A judge had erred in stating that the sentence he imposed on an offender who had been convicted following a retrial would start on the day he was sentencing him. In accordance with the Criminal Appeal Act 1968 Sch.2 para.2(3), the sentence should have commenced from the date the equivalent sentence passed following the original trial would have begun.
CA (Crim Div) (Sir Brian Leveson PQBD, Simler J, Sir Brian Keith)
11 April 2019
A young offender’s conviction for murder was not unsafe, as he had not shown that a change in the law regarding joint enterprise following his conviction would have affected the jury’s verdict.