header-logo header-logo

Crime Bill threatens justice

24 January 2008
Issue: 7305 / Categories: Legal News , Public , Legal services , Constitutional law
printer mail-detail

Crime Bill

Sections of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill are “unnec­essary and undesirable” and would “undermine the operation of the courts”, the Bar Council and the Criminal Bar Association (CBA) claim.

The Bill seeks to amend the test applied by the Court of Appeal when considering an appeal against conviction, including cases where there has been an abuse of the investigative or pros­ecution process. It also proposes extending the powers of non-legally qualified case workers to conduct trials for serious offences in magistrates’ courts. 

Sally O’Neill QC, chairman of the CBA, says: “Cases involving contested facts, issues of law, and serious allegations with imprison­ment as a possibility, should be conducted by properly qualified advocates who are subject to independent regulation otherwise there will be an increased risk of miscarriages of justice.”

Bar chairman, Tim Dutton QC, says cl 42 of the Bill attempts to amend the test applied by the Court of Appeal when considering an appeal against conviction.

“It is in part unnecessary and undesirable because it will alter the role of the Court of Appeal from a court of review to a tribu­nal of fact. It does not recognise the way in which the rules of crim­inal appeals currently operate. It will increase cost and delay,” he says.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll