header-logo header-logo

04 April 2008
Issue: 7315 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

CRIMINAL LITIGATION

R (H) v Guildford Youth Court [2008] All ER (D) 02 (Mar)

A juvenile was accused of assault. Before he was interviewed by the police it was intimated to his solicitor that it was possible that the case would be dealt with by way of a final warning.

The juvenile admitted the offence and was bailed to an “intervention clinic”, when it was indicated that the matter would be dealt with by way of a final warning. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) subsequently decided that a prosecution would be appropriate, and he was charged.

HELD The fact that a promise was made by an officer of the state, namely the police officer who was in charge at that stage deciding whether or not to prosecute, is something that there is a clear public interest in upholding. The proceedings should therefore have been stayed as an abuse of process.
 

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

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
back-to-top-scroll