header-logo header-logo

09 June 2020
Categories: Legal News , Criminal , Profession
printer mail-detail

Appeals system failing women

Women face particular barriers due to their sex when seeking to overturn unsafe convictions or unfair sentences in the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division), research has found

Barriers included gendered factors, such as shame and lack of confidence to take on appeals. More than four-fifths (86%) of women writing for advice on appeal were significantly outside of the 28-day appeal window from the date of their conviction or sentence. Reasons for delay included the fact that women often did not feel comfortable revealing their experiences of gendered trauma such as domestic abuse to legal representatives at trial and were afraid of being disbelieved.

More than half the women felt custody was a disproportionate punishment for their crime. One third felt the effect of imprisonment on their children had not been considered by the sentencing judge. More than a quarter felt their pre-sentence report was incorrect or incomplete and complained that their mitigating circumstances were not given appropriate weight at sentencing.

Lawyers told the researchers they feel it has become harder to win cases in the Court of Appeal, and that the court tries to dissuade attempts to appeal. They also raised cuts to legal aid funding, which prevent many women from accessing justice. The statistics back up this perception―between 2011 and 2019, appeal applications to this court fell by 36%.

The research, by APPEAL (a non-profit law practice specialising in criminal appeals), is the first to focus on women’s experiences of the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division).

APPEAL women’s justice advocate and author of the report, Naima Sakande said: ‘This report raises serious questions about whether the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) is a legal body capable of righting wrongs done to women by the criminal justice system. Women who have been unfairly sentenced or wrongfully convicted deserve access to justice.’

Categories: Legal News , Criminal , Profession
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Kennedys—Milan Devani

Kennedys—Milan Devani

Chief information officer appointment strengthens technology leadership

Maguire Family Law—Hannah Barlow & Sophie Hughes

Maguire Family Law—Hannah Barlow & Sophie Hughes

Firm strengthens Wilmslow team with two solicitor appointments

DWF—Ian Plumley

DWF—Ian Plumley

Londoninsurance and reinsurance practice announces partner appointment

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll