header-logo header-logo

Criminal Litigation

18 October 2007
Issue: 7293 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

R v Chal [2007] All ER (D) 70 (Oct)

The defendant was found unfit to stand trial. In proceedings under s 4A of the Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 (CP(I)A 1964), the judge allowed a statement of a prosecution witness who could not be traced to be read pursuant to the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (CJA 2003), s 116.

The defendant submitted that the judge had erred in admitting hearsay evidence because the hearing under CP(I)A 1964, s 4A did not amount to “criminal proceedings” as defined in CJA 2003, s 134.

HELD The phrase “criminal proceedings” could properly be interpreted to include all proceedings in the criminal procedure framework, including ancillary proceedings that did not of themselves result in a criminal conviction or punishment.

A jury should only make a finding that the defendant committed the actus reus of the offence if it was satisfied, to the criminal standard of proof, that he did the act alleged. The purpose of CP(I)A 1964, s 4A is that a person should not be detained unless they would have been found guilty at a criminal trial. Therefore, it is imperative that the same rules of evidence should be applied to proceedings under s 4A as would have been applied if it were a criminal trial in the strict sense.

The judge therefore had the power to admit the hearsay statement either on the basis that CJA 2003 applied as a matter of statutory interpretation, or on the basis that the court should adopt the same rules of evidence as in a criminal trial.

Issue: 7293 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-details

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
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
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
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
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
Artificial intelligence may be revolutionising the law, but its misuse could wreck cases and careers, warns Clare Arthurs of Penningtons Manches Cooper in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll