header-logo header-logo

Correcting mistakes in the magistrates’ courts

24 February 2023 / Dr Charanjit Singh
Issue: 8014 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail
112061
To what extent has the Court of Appeal clarified the power of the magistrates’ court to reopen cases in order to rectify mistakes? Dr Charanjit Singh reports
  • Examines R (on the application of Simon Williamson) v City of Westminster, in which the Court of Appeal has sought to define the application of s 142 of the Magistrates Court Act 1980 (MCA 1980).
  • Presents a practical examination of case law and explores the implications for defendants’ seeking to reopen their cases following a guilty plea and sentencing.
  • Notes the current position of the law under s 142, MCA 1980.

Few would argue against the notion that some of the systemic safeguards designed to mitigate miscarriages of justice, prevent the abuse of due process, and assure that convictions of the guilty are beyond reasonable doubt (Woolmington v DPP [1935] AC 462) are some of the most important aspects of British criminal justice.

The decision of the Court of Appeal in R (on the application of Williamson)

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll