header-logo header-logo

14 February 2008
Issue: 7308 / Categories: Case law , Legal services , Profession , Law digest
printer mail-detail

CRIMINAL LITIGATION

R v Clarke [2008] UKHL 8, [2008] All ER (D) 69 (Feb)

Without an indictment there cannot be a valid trial and, on the express language of the Administration of Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1933, s 2(1) the only step which changes a draft indictment into an indictment is the signing of it by the proper officer of the court.

 

Accordingly, that step is indispensable, and R v Morais [1988] 3 All ER 161 was correctly decided. There is no basis upon which the court in R v Ashton [2007] All ER (D) 19 (Feb) could properly depart from Morais, which was clearly binding on it. In the present case, the appellants had been arraigned and tried without a valid indictment; the addition of a signature at a very late stage could not “throw a blanket of legality over the invalid proceedings already conducted”.

 

Lord Bingham (para 20) added that the decisions in R v Sekhon[2006] 1 AC 368 and R v Soneji [2005] 4 All ER 321 are valuable and salutary, but the effect of the sea change which they wrought has been exaggerated and they do not warrant a wholesale jettisoning of all rules affecting procedure, irrespective of their legal effect.

 

Issue: 7308 / Categories: Case law , Legal services , Profession , Law digest
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

JMW—Belinda Brooke

JMW—Belinda Brooke

Employment and people solutions offering boosted by partner hire

NEWS

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law
back-to-top-scroll