header-logo header-logo

CRIMINAL LITIGATION

29 February 2008
Issue: 7310 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

R v Taylor [2008] All ER (D) 272 (Feb)

The defendant was unable to attend court during the course of his trial. The judge concluded that, although the defendant had a legitimate medical reason for his absence, the trial should continue in his absence.

HELD In cases where the defendant is absent involuntarily, the judge is obliged to consider how long the proposed adjournment is likely to be and the extent to which the legal representatives could, in the defendant’s absence, receive and act on instructions.

The court should take into account the public interest in ensuring continuous trials; the public interest does not allow the trial to be put off for an indefinite period.

However, where a defendant is absent through ill health, the judge must be astute to see if an adjournment for a short period will allow the defendant to recover, and such an adjournment should not be refused unless the circumstances compel it.

If the judge has doubts about the genuineness or gravity of the defendant’s symptoms, the proper course is to adjourn

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

DWF—19 appointments

DWF—19 appointments

Belfast team bolstered by three senior hires and 16 further appointments

Cadwalader—Andro Atlaga

Cadwalader—Andro Atlaga

Firm strengthens leveraged finance team with London partner hire

Knights—Ella Dodgson & Rebecca Laffan

Knights—Ella Dodgson & Rebecca Laffan

Double hire marks launch of family team in Leeds

NEWS
Small law firms want to embrace technology but feel lost in a maze of jargon, costs and compliance fears, writes Aisling O’Connell of the Solicitors Regulation Authority in this week's NLJ
The Supreme Court issued a landmark judgment in July that overturned the convictions of Tom Hayes and Carlo Palombo, once poster boys of the Libor and Euribor scandal. In NLJ this week, Neil Swift of Peters & Peters considers what the ruling means for financial law enforcement
Charlie Mercer and Astrid Gillam of Stewarts crunch the numbers on civil fraud claims in the English courts, in this week's NLJ. New data shows civil fraud claims rising steadily since 2014, with the King’s Bench Division overtaking the Commercial Court as the forum of choice for lower-value disputes
Bea Rossetto of the National Pro Bono Centre makes the case for ‘General Practice Pro Bono’—using core legal skills to deliver life-changing support, without the need for niche expertise—in this week's NLJ
Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve reports on Haynes v Thomson, the first judicial application of the Supreme Court’s For Women Scotland ruling in a discrimination claim, in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll