The High Court's Jurisdiction in Relation to Criminal

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The High Court's Jurisdiction in Relation to Criminal The Law Commission Consultation Paper No 184 THE HIGH COURT’S JURISDICTION IN RELATION TO CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS A Consultation Paper The Law Commission was set up by section 1 of the Law Commissions Act 1965 for the purpose of promoting the reform of the law. The Law Commissioners are: The Honourable Mr Justice Etherton, Chairman Mr Stuart Bridge Mr David Hertzell Professor Jeremy Horder Kenneth Parker QC Professor Martin Partington CBE is Special Consultant to the Law Commission responsible for housing law reform. The Chief Executive of the Law Commission is Steve Humphreys and its offices are at Conquest House, 37-38 John Street, Theobalds Road, London WC1N 2BQ. This consultation paper, completed on 1 October 2007, is circulated for comment and criticism only. It does not represent the final views of the Law Commission. The Law Commission would be grateful for comments on its proposals before 22 February 2008. Comments may be sent either – By post to: David Hughes Law Commission Conquest House 37-38 John Street Theobalds Road London WC1N 2BQ Tel: 020-7453-1212 Fax: 020-7453-1297 By email to: [email protected] It would be helpful if, where possible, comments sent by post could also be sent on disk, or by email to the above address, in any commonly used format. We will treat all responses as public documents in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act and we may attribute comments and include a list of all respondents' names in any final report we publish. Those who wish to submit a confidential response should contact the Commission before sending the response. We will disregard automatic confidentiality disclaimers generated by an IT system. This consultation paper is available free of charge on our website at: http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/judicial_review.htm THE LAW COMMISSION THE HIGH COURT’S JURISDICTION IN RELATION TO CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS CONTENTS Paragraph Page PART 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 1 Terms of reference 1.1 1 Understanding the terms of reference 1.2 1 The origins, nature of and limitations upon the High Court’s 1.2 1 jurisdictions over the Crown Court Inferior and superior courts 1.2 1 Inferior and superior courts prior to 1971 1.4 2 Challenging decisions of inferior courts and superior courts 1.7 2 prior to 1971 Judicial Review 1.7 2 Quarter Sessions 1.7 2 Assizes 1.8 2 Case Stated 1.9 3 Quarter Sessions 1.9 3 Assizes 1.13 3 The establishment of the Crown Court in place of Assizes 1.14 4 and Quarter Sessions The jurisdictions exercised by the Crown Court in relation to 1.15 4 criminal proceedings Aspects of the Crown Court’s first instance 1.17 5 jurisdiction The High Court’s jurisdiction in relation to criminal 1.22 6 proceedings in the Crown Court The High Court’s jurisdiction in relation to decisions 1.22 6 of the Crown Court when exercising its appellate and sentencing jurisdictions The High Court’s jurisdiction in relation to decisions 1.23 6 of the Crown Court exercising its first instance jurisdiction ‘Relating to trial on indictment’ 1.26 7 The problems with the current law 1.32 9 The meaning of ‘relating to trial on indictment’ 1.32 9 Lack of clarity and simplicity 1.33 9 Different avenues for challenging decisions of the 1.33 9 Crown Court depending on which jurisdiction the Crown Court was exercising iii Paragraph Page Different avenues for challenging decisions of the 1.37 10 Crown Court exercising its appellate or committal for sentence jurisdictions Different avenues for appealing decisions of 1.40 11 magistrates’ courts Recommendations made by Lord Justice Auld 1.42 11 An overview of our main provisional proposals 1.45 12 The role of the High Court 1.45 12 Appeal by case stated and judicial review 1.46 12 Challenging convictions and sentences 1.47 12 Challenging acquittals 1.49 12 Acquittals that result from ‘terminating’ rulings 1.50 12 Acquittals that do not result from ‘terminating’ rulings 1.51 13 Challenging determinations, judgments, orders and rulings 1.52 13 other than convictions, sentences and acquittals The means of challenge 1.52 13 Leave to appeal 1.53 13 Grounds for appealing 1.54 13 Circumstances in which the new statutory appeal 1.55 14 may be invoked Decisions made by the Crown Court in cases 1.55 14 tried on indictment Decisions made after the jury has 1.56 14 been discharged Decisions made after the jury is 1.58 14 sworn and after it has been discharged Decisions made before the jury is 1.62 15 sworn Alternative proposals 1.66 16 Decisions made by the Crown Court when 1.67 16 exercising its appellate jurisdiction Decisions made by the Crown Court 1.68 16 after it has determined the appeal Decisions made by the Crown Court 1.70 17 before it has determined the appeal Magistrates’ courts and the Court Martial 1.72 17 Structure of paper 1.73 18 PART 2: CHALLENGING DECISIONS MADE IN CRIMINAL 2.1 19 PROCEEDINGS – THE CURRENT LAW Criminal proceedings in England and Wales 2.1 19 Trials of defendants aged 18 and over 2.1 19 Trials of defendants aged under 18 2.5 20 iv Paragraph Page Challenging decisions of magistrates’ courts 2.10 21 Appealing against or seeking review of a conviction and/or 2.10 21 sentence Appeal to the Crown Court against conviction and/or 2.11 21 sentence Appeal to the High Court by case stated 2.12 22 Powers of High Court on appeal by case 2.14 22 stated Application to the High Court for judicial review 2.15 23 Which avenue to choose? 2.17 23 Appeal to the Crown Court or appeal by case 2.18 23 stated to the High Court? Appeal to the Crown Court or apply to the 2.21 24 High Court for judicial review? Appeal by case stated to the High Court or 2.24 25 apply to the High Court for judicial review? Appealing against or seeking review of an acquittal 2.25 25 Appeal to the High Court by case stated 2.26 26 Application to the High Court for judicial review 2.28 27 Appealing against or seeking review of ancillary orders 2.29 27 made or not made following conviction or acquittal Appealing against or seeking review of interlocutory 2.30 27 decisions Challenging decisions accepting or declining 2.33 28 jurisdiction Challenging decisions made in committal proceedings 2.36 29 Appeal by case stated or apply for judicial review? 2.41 30 Appeal from the High Court to the House of Lords 2.43 31 Challenging decisions of the Crown Court 2.44 32 Challenging decisions of the Crown Court when exercising 2.47 32 its appellate jurisdiction Challenging final decisions, including the making of 2.47 32 (or the refusal to make) ancillary orders consequent on conviction or acquittal Appeal by case stated 2.48 33 Application for judicial review 2.50 33 Appealing against or applying for review of 2.52 33 interlocutory decisions Appeal by case stated 2.52 33 Applying for judicial review 2.53 34 Challenging decisions of the Crown Court when exercising 2.54 34 its first instance jurisdiction Appeal to the Court of Appeal 2.54 34 Appealing against conviction and sentence 2.54 34 v Paragraph Page Appealing in cases where the defendant’s 2.56 34 fitness to plead is in issue Defendant found fit to plead 2.57 34 Defendant found unfit to plead 2.58 35 Challenging an acquittal 2.61 35 Retrials for serious offences 2.62 36 Appeals against ‘terminating’ rulings 2.63 36 The powers of the Court of Appeal 2.69 39 hearing an appeal under section 58 Appeal against rulings made in preparatory 2.70 39 hearings The power to order preparatory 2.70 39 hearings What rulings can be made as part of 2.75 41 a preparatory hearing? Which rulings made at preparatory 2.76 41 hearings are amenable to appeal? The meaning of ‘any question of law 2.86 44 relating to the case’ Appealing against evidentiary rulings relating 2.90 45 to prosecution evidence The power of the Court of Appeal to 2.92 46 reverse an evidentiary ruling Miscellaneous statutory appeals 2.93 46 Referring an acquittal 2.94 47 Referring an unduly lenient sentence 2.95 47 Appealing to or seeking review by the High Court 2.96 47 The interpretation of ‘relating to trial on 2.100 48 indictment’ The policy consideration underlying 2.101 49 the interpretation of ‘relating to trial on indictment Decisions that have been held to be ones 2.102 49 ‘relating to trial on indictment’ Decisions that have been held to be ones 2.103 50 not ‘relating to trial on indictment’ Bail 2.104 51 Decisions and orders following a 2.113 53 finding of unfitness to plead Orders made without jurisdiction 2.120 55 A third party application for a 2.126 57 declaration Challenging decisions made by the Crown Court when 2.129 58 exercising its committal for sentence jurisdiction vi Paragraph Page Flowchart illustrating current structure of appeals in criminal courts 59 PART 3: THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS 3.1 60 AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS The purpose of this Part 3.1 60 Compliance with Articles 6 and 13 ECHR 3.3 60 The scheme for protection of Convention rights in UK law 3.3 60 What is required by article 6 ECHR in the context of Crown 3.9 62 Court determinations of Convention rights? Does section 29 operate in compliance with article 6(1) 3.13 63 ECHR? Defendants 3.13 63 Third parties 3.14 64 The policy implications of the section 29 exclusion 3.17 65 PART 4: PROPOSALS: (1) A NEW FRAMEWORK 4.1 67 Introduction 4.1 67 Case stated 4.3 67 The current use of appeal by case stated as a means of 4.3 67 challenging decisions of the Crown Court Case stated as a means of challenging decisions 4.4 68 made in trials on indictment Case stated as a means of challenging decisions of 4.6 68 the Crown Court made when exercising its appellate or committal for sentence jurisdictions
Recommended publications
  • PUBLIC RECORDS ACT 1958 (C
    PUBLIC RECORDS ACT 1958 (c. 51)i, ii An Act to make new provision with respect to public records and the Public Record Office, and for connected purposes. [23rd July 1958] General responsibility of the Lord Chancellor for public records. 1. - (1) The direction of the Public Record Office shall be transferred from the Master of the Rolls to the Lord Chancellor, and the Lord Chancellor shall be generally responsible for the execution of this Act and shall supervise the care and preservation of public records. (2) There shall be an Advisory Council on Public Records to advise the Lord Chancellor on matters concerning public records in general and, in particular, on those aspects of the work of the Public Record Office which affect members of the public who make use of the facilities provided by the Public Record Office. The Master of the Rolls shall be chairman of the said Council and the remaining members of the Council shall be appointed by the Lord Chancellor on such terms as he may specify. [(2A) The matters on which the Advisory Council on Public Records may advise the Lord Chancellor include matters relating to the application of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 to information contained in public records which are historical records within the meaning of Part VI of that Act.iii] (3) The Lord Chancellor shall in every year lay before both Houses of Parliament a report on the work of the Public Record Office, which shall include any report made to him by the Advisory Council on Public Records.
    [Show full text]
  • Lancaster Castle: the Rebuilding of the County Gaol and Courts
    Contrebis 2019 v37 LANCASTER CASTLE: THE REBUILDING OF THE COUNTY GAOL AND COURTS John Champness Abstract This paper details the building and rebuilding of Lancaster Castle in the late-eighteenth and early- nineteenth centuries to expand and improve the prison facilities there. Most of the present buildings in the Castle date from a major scheme of extending the County Gaol, undertaken in the last years of the eighteenth century. The principal architect was Thomas Harrison, who had come to Lancaster in 1782 after winning the competition to design Skerton Bridge (Champness 2005, 16). The scheme arose from concern about the unsatisfactory state of the Gaol which was largely unchanged from the medieval Castle (Figure 1). Figure 1. Plan of Lancaster Castle taken from Mackreth’s map of Lancaster, 1778 People had good reasons for their concern, because life in Georgian gaols was somewhat disorganised. The major reason lay in how the role of gaols had been expanded over the years in response to changing pressures. County gaols had originally been established in the Middle Ages to provide short-term accommodation for only two groups of people – those awaiting trial at the twice- yearly Assizes, and convicted criminals who were waiting for their sentences to be carried out, by hanging or transportation to an overseas colony. From the late-seventeenth century, these people were joined by debtors. These were men and women with cash-flow problems, who could avoid formal bankruptcy by forfeiting their freedom until their finances improved. During the mid- eighteenth century, numbers were further increased by the imprisonment of ‘felons’, that is, convicted criminals who had not been sentenced to death, but could not be punished in a local prison or transported.
    [Show full text]
  • Court Reform in England
    Comments COURT REFORM IN ENGLAND A reading of the Beeching report' suggests that the English court reform which entered into force on 1 January 1972 was the result of purely domestic considerations. The members of the Commission make no reference to the civil law countries which Great Britain will join in an important economic and political regional arrangement. Yet even a cursory examination of the effects of the reform on the administration of justice in England and Wales suggests that English courts now resemble more closely their counterparts in Western Eu- rope. It should be stated at the outset that the new organization of Eng- lish courts is by no means the result of the 1971 Act alone. The Act crowned the work of various legislative measures which have brought gradual change for a period of well over a century, including the Judicature Acts 1873-75, the Interpretation Act 1889, the Supreme Court of Judicature (Consolidation) Act 1925, the Administration of Justice Act 1933, the County Courts Act 1934, the Criminal Appeal Act 1966 and the Criminal Law Act 1967. The reform culminates a prolonged process of response to social change affecting the legal structure in England. Its effect was to divorce the organization of the courts from tradition and history in order to achieve efficiency and to adapt the courts to new tasks and duties which they must meet in new social and economic conditions. While the earlier acts, including the 1966 Criminal Appeal Act, modernized the structure of the Supreme Court of Judicature, the 1971 Act extended modern court structure to the intermediate level, creating the new Crown Court, and provided for the regular admin- istration of justice in civil matters by the High Court in England and Wales, outside the Royal Courts in London.
    [Show full text]
  • CPS Sussex Overall Performance Assessment Undertaken August 2007
    CPS Sussex Overall Performance Assessment Undertaken August 2007 Promoting Improvement in Criminal Justice HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate CPS Sussex Overall Performance Assessment Undertaken August 2007 Promoting Improvement in Criminal Justice HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate CPS Sussex Overall Performance Assessment Report 2007 ABBREVIATIONS Common abbreviations used in this report are set out below. Local abbreviations are explained in the report. ABM Area Business Manager HMCPSI Her Majesty’s Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate ABP Area Business Plan JDA Judge Directed Acquittal AEI Area Effectiveness Inspection JOA Judge Ordered Acquittal ASBO Anti-Social Behaviour Order JPM Joint Performance Monitoring BCU Basic Command Unit or Borough Command Unit LCJB Local Criminal Justice Board BME Black and Minority Ethnic MAPPA Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements CCP Chief Crown Prosecutor MG3 Form on which a record of the CJA Criminal Justice Area charging decision is made CJS Criminal Justice System NCTA No Case to Answer CJSSS Criminal Justice: Simple, Speedy, NRFAC Non Ring-Fenced Administrative Summary Costs CJU Criminal Justice Unit NWNJ No Witness No Justice CMS Case Management System OBTJ Offences Brought to Justice CPIA Criminal Procedure and OPA Overall Performance Assessment Investigations Act PCD Pre-Charge Decision CPO Case Progression Officer PCMH Plea and Case Management Hearing CPS Crown Prosecution Service POCA Proceeds of Crime Act CPSD CPS Direct PTPM Prosecution Team Performance CQA Casework
    [Show full text]
  • Request for Transcription of Court Or Tribunal Proceedings
    EX107GN Guidance Notes – Request for Transcription of Court or Tribunal proceedings If you want a transcript of proceedings in any court or tribunal (except the Court of Appeal Criminal Division or the Administrative Court*), please complete form EX107. If you want to order a transcript for more than one case, please complete a separate form EX107 for each different case in which you’re interested. Please note that not all Tribunals record proceedings so transcription services may not be available. Enquiries should be made to the relevant tribunal prior to completion of this form. EX107 can be sent digitally or by post to the court or tribunal. Contract details for the relevant venue can be obtained via Court Finder at https://courttribunalfinder.service.gov.uk/search/ For Civil and Family jurisdictions where you are selecting a transcription company, you are advised to talk with the transcription company before you complete form EX107. If an EX107 is requested by your chosen transcription company this should, where possible, be sent digitally using the e-mail addresses in Section 2a. You may send by post if you do not have an e-mail account. There may be occasions where a transcript you have requested via the EX107 may have already been produced for HMCTS. There may also be times where the court’s authorised Transcription Company provided a stenographer or court logger to make a record of the proceedings. In these circumstances the court’s authorised Transcription Company will provide the transcript and the court will tell you who to contact. Where a transcript is required of a court hearing which was held in private (ex parte) the process will vary by jurisdiction as follows: a) In cases heard at the Royal Courts of Justice and Crown Courts and some tribunals (or if the Court so orders at other venues), where a transcript is required of Court proceedings which were officially designated by the judge as being held in private (ex-parte), authorisation will be required from a Judge.
    [Show full text]
  • Standing Committee on Judicial
    Chapter 3 : The British Experience 3.01 In the Mason Report, the case of Britain is presented as one of the jurisdictions where there is an absolute prohibition against reduction of judicial remuneration. 1 The existing British system of determination of judicial remuneration and the latest review on judicial salaries have also been discussed in the Mason Report. On the issue of reduction of remuneration in the United Kingdom, the following passages are relevant. 3.12 In 1760 the Commissions and Salaries of Judges Act2 made explicit what may have been implicit in the Act of Settlement. It secured the payment of the judges’ salaries without reduction so long as the judge’s commission continued and remained in force. The Act did not apply to colonial judges. 3.14 More recently, the Courts Act 1971 and the Supreme Court Act 1981, ss 12(1) and (3), have expressly provided that the salaries of Circuit Judges and Supreme Court Judges respectively “may be increased but not reduced”. 3.02 The 1760 Act is also referred to in the context of the discussion of the Australian position in the Mason Report – 3.28 Section 40 of the Constitution Act 1855 (NSW) provided for judicial remuneration but reverted to the earlier wording of the Commissions and Salaries of Judges Act 1760 (Imp). It provided that salaries fixed by Act of Parliament shall be paid and payable to every judge for the time being so long as their commissions should continue and remain in force. No express reference was made to the prohibition of the diminution of a judge’s salary.
    [Show full text]
  • Courts Act 1971
    Status: Point in time view as at 01/10/1992. Changes to legislation: There are currently no known outstanding effects for the Courts Act 1971. (See end of Document for details) Courts Act 1971 1971 CHAPTER 23 An Act to make further provision as respects the Supreme Court and county courts, judges and juries, to establish a Crown Court as part of the Supreme Court to try indictments and exercise certain other jurisdiction, to abolish courts of assize and certain other courts and to deal with their jurisdiction and other consequential matters, and to amend in other respects the law about courts and court proceedings. [12th May 1971] Extent Information E1 For extent see s. 59(5)(6)(7). Commencement Information I1 Act not in force at Royal Assent see s. 59(2); Act wholly in force at 1. 1. 1972. PART I INTRODUCTORY [F11 The Supreme Court. (1) The Supreme Court shall consist of the Court of Appeal and the High Court, together with the Crown Court established by this Act. (2) All courts of assize are hereby abolished, and Commissions, whether ordinary or special, to hold any court of assize shall not be issued.] Textual Amendments F1 Pts. I and II (ss. 1–15) repealed (E.W.) by Supreme Court Act 1981 (c. 54, SIF 37), s. 152(4), Sch. 7 2 Courts Act 1971 (c. 23) Part II – The Crown Court Document Generated: 2021-04-11 Status: Point in time view as at 01/10/1992. Changes to legislation: There are currently no known outstanding effects for the Courts Act 1971.
    [Show full text]
  • [email protected]
    Briefing and Business Estates Directorate 4th Floor, 102 Petty France LONDON SW1H 9AJ 020 3334 2632 E [email protected] Pat James C/o: [email protected] Our ref: FOI/106672 18 August 2016 Dear Mr James Thank you for your email of 23 July, in which you asked for the following information from the Ministry of Justice (MOJ): “All relevant recorded documentation of the locations within the United Kingdom where G4S provide 'Court Security Officer' services to HMCTS”. Your request has been handled under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). I can confirm that the MOJ holds the information you requested and I am pleased to provide this to you by way of the attached annex. You can also find more information by reading the full text of the FOIA, available at http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/36/contents). You have the right to appeal this decision if you think it is incorrect or if your request has been handled incorrectly. Details can be found in the ‘How to Appeal’ section attached to this letter. Disclosure Log You can also view information that the MOJ has disclosed in response to previous FOI requests. Responses are anonymised and published on our on-line disclosure log which can be found on the MoJ website: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of- justice/series/freedom-of-information-disclosure-log Yours sincerely Signed by Darren Fearnley Annex HMCTS sites where security is provided by G4S Building Name Address Aberdeen Tribunal Atholl House, 84-86 Guild Street, Aberdeen
    [Show full text]
  • Change at Lewes Crown Court
    News from the South Eastern Circuit THE CIRCUITEER INSIDE THIS ISSUE 8 9 10 12 19 Meeting of the Inns of Court John Downes 23rd Keble A view from the Chairs of the College of Alliot a tribute Course Naval Bar SEC Bar Messes Advocacy (ICCA) ALL CHANGE AT LEADER’S LEWES CROWN REPORT And so, the time has come for me to bid farewell as Leader of COURT this great Circuit. 2016 has been a time of change across Max Hill QC See page 3 the whole of the Criminal Justice System. Lewes Crown Court has seen significant change, with its three most experienced judges retiring in the space of a few months. See page 6 Wellbeing at the Bar Does our wellbeing depend on the respite we all seek to find in holidays or should it be more a part of our daily lives even whilst working. Valerie Charbit See page 22 Reflections of a Circuiteer CIRCUIT TRIP TO PARIS I was called to the Bar in 1963. To practice It has been a number of years since the last circuit trip, and at what was then called the Independent many more since the last to Paris. This diplomatic mission Bar, whether you intended to venture out was long overdue, and, as we discovered from the moment of London or not, you were required to we arrived, a venture enthusiastically welcomed by our join a Circuit. Parisian counterparts. See page 14 See page 5 Igor Judge THE CIRCUITEER Issue 42 / October 2016 1 News from the South Eastern Circuit EDITOR’S COLUMN Much has happened across or friends, we are reminded • 88% of trans people have the Circuit since the Spring of the transient nature of our experienced depression edition, with changes of flickering flames.
    [Show full text]
  • Statute Law Revision 17Th Report (SLC 193; LC 285)
    [Coat of Arms] The Law Commission and The Scottish Law Commission (LAW COM No 285) (SCOT LAW COM No 193) STATUTE LAW REVISION: SEVENTEENTH REPORT DRAFT STATUTE LAW (REPEALS) BILL Report on a Reference under Section 3(1)(e) of the Law Commissions Act 1965 Presented to the Parliament of the United Kingdom by the Lord High Chancellor by Command of Her Majesty Laid before the Scottish Parliament by the Scottish Ministers December 2003 Cm 6070 SE/2003/313 £xx.xx The Law Commission and the Scottish Law Commission were set up by the Law Commissions Act 1965 for the purpose of promoting the reform of the law. The Law Commissioners are: The Honourable Mr Justice Toulson, Chairman Professor Hugh Beale QC Mr Stuart Bridge Professor Martin Partington CBE Judge Alan Wilkie QC The Chief Executive of the Law Commission is Mr Michael Sayers and its offices are at Conquest House, 37-38 John Street, Theobalds Road, London WC1N 2BQ. The Scottish Law Commissioners are: The Honourable Lord Eassie, Chairman Professor Gerard Maher QC Professor Kenneth G C Reid Professor Joseph M Thomson Mr Colin J Tyre QC The Secretary of the Scottish Law Commission is Miss Jane L McLeod and its offices are at 140 Causewayside, Edinburgh EH9 1PR. The terms of this report were agreed on 17 November 2003. The text of this report is available on the Internet at: http://www.lawcom.gov.uk http://www.scotlawcom.gov.uk ii LAW COMMISSION SCOTTISH LAW COMMISSION STATUTE LAW REVISION: SEVENTEENTH REPORT DRAFT STATUTE LAW (REPEALS) BILL CONTENTS Paragraph Page REPORT 1 APPENDIX 1: DRAFT
    [Show full text]
  • Senior Courts Act 1981, Part I Is up to Date with All Changes Known to Be in Force on Or Before 27 June 2021
    Changes to legislation: Senior Courts Act 1981, Part I is up to date with all changes known to be in force on or before 27 June 2021. There are changes that may be brought into force at a future date. Changes that have been made appear in the content and are referenced with annotations. (See end of Document for details) View outstanding changes Senior Courts Act 1981 1981 CHAPTER 54 PART I CONSTITUTION OF [F1SENIOR COURTS] Textual Amendments F1 Words in Pt. 1 heading substituted (1.10.2009) by Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (c. 4), ss. 59, 148, Sch. 11 para. 26(1); S.I. 2009/1604, art. 2(d) The [F2Senior Courts] Textual Amendments F2 Words in s. 1 cross-heading substituted (1.10.2009) by Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (c. 4), ss. 59, 148, Sch. 11 para. 26(1); S.I. 2009/1604, art. 2(d) 1 The [F3Senior Courts]. (1) The [F3Senior Courts] of England and Wales shall consist of the Court of Appeal, the High Court of Justice and the Crown Court, each having such jurisdiction as is conferred on it by or under this or any other Act. F4(2) . Textual Amendments F3 Words in s. 1 and side-note substituted (1.10.2009) by Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (c. 4), ss. 59, 148, Sch. 11 para. 26(1); S.I. 2009/1604, art. 2(d) F4 S 1(2) repealed (3.4.2006) by Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (c. 4), ss. 7(5), 148(1), Sch. 18 Pt. 2; S.I. 2006/1014, art.
    [Show full text]
  • A Barrister's Role in the Plea Decision
    A Barrister’s Role in the Plea Decision: An analysis of drivers affecting advice in the Crown Court By James Dominic Edward Barry Queen Mary, University of London Submitted for PhD I declare that the work presented in this thesis is my own …………………………………. Date: ……………………………. James D.E Barry 2 Abstract: This thesis explores the reasons behind barristers' advice to defendants in the Crown Court on plea, primarily through interviews with criminal law practitioners themselves. Beginning with a critical overview of the current research, the thesis argues that the views of criminal barristers are a neglected significant source of information in developing an understanding of why particular advice is given. The thesis, in the context of other research, analyses the data from interviews conducted with current practitioners on the London and the Midlands Circuits, and discusses the various drivers that act upon barristers in deciding what advice to give. Starting with the actual advice given and the advising styles adopted, the thesis explores why guilty pleas might be advised and plea bargains sought with prosecutors. The research goes on to examine the impact of various influences, including legal, ethical, cultural, regional and financial to produce an overview of what factors impact upon a barrister's advice. The thesis argues that the current view of the Bar sustained in much of the literature is insufficiently nuanced and outdated, and that the reasons behind the advice given to defendants on plea are extraordinarily varied, occasionally contradictory, and highly complex. The thesis concludes that the data from the interviews warrants a rethink of why particular advice is given and that discovering what drives barristers’ advice is critical to formulating law and government policy.
    [Show full text]