Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Circuit Court legal aid decision quashed due to exclusive focus on complexity of charge
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court allows in part application for judicial review: (a) granting an order of certiorari in respect of the decision of the Circuit Court on legal aid and remitting the matter back to that court for further consideration of whether second counsel was warranted having regard to all the relevant factors, not just the complexity of the charge; and (b) refusing to make an order of prohibition restraining the applicant's trial on charges of indecent assault dating to before 1992, as such a remedy was only appropriate where unfairness could not be avoided by the rulings and directions of the trial judge and the delay in prosecuting the applicant's case did not meet this test.
Application for judicial review - applicant awaiting trial on four counts of indecent assault - allegations made by applicant's niece - seeking order of certiorari in respect of a decision of the Circuit Court Judge refusing him second counsel under the legal aid scheme - also seeking order of prohibition restraining the trial itself - also seeking declaratory relief to effect that trial would be in breach of right to reasonable expedition and damages for such breach - because of imminence of the trial at the time application made (February 2017), court invited to confine itself to the issues of legal aid and prohibition - consideration of declaratory relief and/or damages for alleged breach of right to trial with reasonable expedition held over - applicant subsequently decided not to pursue that aspect of his proceedings - whether Circuit Court judge in considering legal aid application solely addressed mind to the issue of "complexity" and failed to consider difficulty of defending a case involving allegations from 1980-1991 and the gravity of the alleged offences - whether Circuit Court failed to consider evidential difficulties in the case - whether any real risk of an unfair trial by reason of alleged delay.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
