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.
Retrial for assault to proceed as court rejects prohibition bid
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
The High Court has denied an application to prohibit a retrial for assault causing harm, affirming that the evidence presented, including a 999 call recording and the absence of forensic reports, does not constitute new evidence warranting a judicial review. The Applicant's previous attempt to halt the retrial was also unsuccessful at both the High Court and the Court of Appeal. The High Court emphasised that the issues raised were either already considered or should have been brought up in the initial proceedings, and thus do not justify prohibiting the upcoming trial. The court also dismissed the Applicant's arguments regarding unlawful entry and the need for corroboration of witness statements, stating these are matters for the trial judge to consider.
retrial, assault causing harm, prohibition, judicial review, 999 call, forensic reports, corroboration, new evidence, High Court, Court of Appeal, Supreme Court, Criminal Procedure Act 1967, unlawful entry, evidence disclosure, Henderson v Henderson (res judicata), A.A. v the Medical Council (bringing entire case in one set of proceedings).
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.
