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.
Dismissal of prosecution upheld after repeated delays and lack of video-link facilities
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
The High Court refused to quash a District Court order which dismissed a prosecution for assault causing harm after repeated adjournments, most recently because necessary video-link facilities for an incapacitated prosecution witness were unavailable. The court determined that the District Court judge had lawfully exercised her discretion in refusing an adjournment and dismissing the charge, having conducted an adequate enquiry and balancing the competing interests of the parties. It was found that whilst other options such as striking out or adjourning the charge existed, the decision to dismiss was rational and open to the judge in the particular circumstances, especially where the accused had attended court multiple times and was not responsible for the delays. Relief by way of judicial review was therefore refused.
judicial review – summary charge – application for certiorari – district court powers – power to dismiss – prosecution dismissed – adjournment refused – video-link facility – right to fair trial – delay – competing interests – public interest in prosecution – balancing exercise – Rules of the Superior Courts (RSC) – Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act 1997
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.
