header-logo header-logo

CRIMINAL LITIGATION

15 February 2008
Issue: 7308 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

R v Y [2008] EWCA Crim 10, [2008] All ER (D) 199 (Jan)

The court had to consider whether or not an interlocutory appeal under the Criminal Justice Act 2003, s 58 could be brought where the ruling was as to admissibility of evidence.

HELD Under s 58(8), the Crown is bound to accept that, if an interlocutory appeal under s 58 fails, the defendant must be acquitted. There is no reason why a single ruling should not qualify both as an s 58 ruling in relation to a count on the indictment—assuming the Crown to agree to acquittal if the appeal fails—and also as an evidentiary ruling under s 62 (not yet in force).

Many rulings made by trial judges can properly be described both as relating to counts on the indictment and as being evidentiary; the difference between the two types of interlocutory appeal lies in the s 58(8) condition. Where the judge first excludes evidence which the Crown wants admitted and then, because of its absence, finds that there is no case to answer, the Crown can (provided it complies with s 58(8)) challenge

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ career profile: Liz McGrath KC

NLJ career profile: Liz McGrath KC

A good book, a glass of chilled Albarino, and being creative for pleasure help Liz McGrath balance the rigours of complex bundles and being Head of Chambers

Burges Salmon—Matthew Hancock-Jones

Burges Salmon—Matthew Hancock-Jones

Firm welcomes director in its financial services financial regulatory team

Gateley Legal—Sam Meiklejohn

Gateley Legal—Sam Meiklejohn

Partner appointment in firm’s equity capital markets team

NEWS

Walkers and runners will take in some of London’s finest views at the 16th annual charity event

Law school partners with charity to give free assistance to litigants in need

Could the Labour government usher in a new era for digital assets, ask Keith Oliver, head of international, and Amalia Neenan FitzGerald, associate, Peters & Peters, in this week’s NLJ

An extra bit is being added to case citations to show the pecking order of the judges concerned. Former district judge Stephen Gold has the details, in his ‘Civil way’ column in this week’s NLJ

The Labour government’s position on alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is not yet clear

back-to-top-scroll