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

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