header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
19 September 2019 / Dr Jon Robins
Issue: 7856 / Categories: Features , Criminal
printer mail-detail

Justice under review (Pt 2)

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

In examining the work of the CCRC, it’s about time attention turned to the Court of Appeal’s role in miscarriage of justice cases, says Jon Robins

As controversial as the miscarriage of justice watchdog has proved to its critics, it has performed one role within the criminal justice system very efficiently. The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) has long served as a decoy, diverting flak away from the Court of Appeal. The Birmingham-based group has absorbed a relentless barrage of criticism from applicants, appeal lawyers, campaigners and academics (although—as I argued in ‘Justice under review (Pt 1)', NLJ, 19 & 26 April 2019, p7—not the media, who seem to have developed a blind spot on the issue of wrongful convictions).

Some of that criticism might have been more fairly directed elsewhere. The Court of Appeal’s treatment of these most intractable of cases is little understood and rarely scrutinised. As a result of the Criminal Appeal Act 1995, only cases with a ‘real possibility’ of being overturned

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll