header-logo header-logo

CRIMINAL LITIGATION

09 March 2007
Issue: 7263 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

R v H (Interlocutory application: Disclosure) [2007] UKHL 7, [2007] All ER (D) 377 (Feb)

A judge who is considering whether to hold a preparatory hearing under the Criminal Justice Act 1987 (CJA 1987), s 7 has only to decide whether a substantial benefit, for one of the purposes listed under sub-s (1), would arise from determining the relevant issues at a preparatory hearing, rather than after a jury had been empanelled.

The judge may determine other interlocutory applications at the same time as the preparatory hearing, but there is no appeal to the Court of Appeal, under CJA 1987, s 9(11), unless the matter for determination falls within s 9(3). It follows that an order in determination of an application for disclosure under the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996, s 8 would qualify for an appeal under CJA 1987, s 9(11) if it involves the determination of a question of law relating to the case.
 

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

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll