header-logo header-logo

06 September 2007 / Thomas Crofts
Issue: 7287 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

A false alarm

The defence of doli incapax still awaits resurrection, says Dr Thomas Crofts

It is widely understood by academics and practitioners that the introduction of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 (CDA 1998), s 34 completely abolished the doctrine of doli incapax, with the effect that children from the age of 10 are held as responsible for their behaviour as adults.

A recent case in the High Court now challenges this accepted understanding of the effect of s 34, questioning whether it abolished merely the presumption of doli incapax or the whole doctrine. If the latter is the case then it would still be open for a defence to be raised that the child was doli incapax.

EFFECT OF S 34

DPP v P [2007] EWHC 946 (Admin), [2007] All ER (D) 244 (Apr) concerned an appeal against a decision to stay proceedings as an abuse of process against a 13-year-old boy. This was based on a finding that the boy would not be able to effectively participate in the trial due to attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and a low IQ. Although the issue of

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

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll