header-logo header-logo

31 May 2007
Issue: 7275 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

CRIMINAL LITIGATION

R v Denton [2007] EWCA Crim 1111, [2007] All ER (D) 192 (Apr)

The Court of Appeal considered judicial interventions and questions in a trial on indictment in light of the guidance given in R v Sharp [1994] QB 261, [1993] 3 All ER 225 (per Lord Justice Stuart-Smith at page 273). 

HELD Judges must be free to clarify the true state of the evidence. There can be no fixed rules about when it is appropriate for a judge to intervene. All must depend on the facts of the individual case. Sustained questioning by the judge should be embarked on only with caution, having regard to the need for judicial restraint and the preservation both of impartiality and the appearance of impartiality. It does not however follow that even judicial interventions which of themselves might raise an eyebrow necessarily result in an unfair trial or an unsafe conviction. Such interventions or questions must be considered in the context of the evidence as a whole, of the conduct of the trial as a whole and also with regard to the summing-up (per Mr Justice Gross at para 18).

Amendment

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