header-logo header-logo

24 July 2019
Issue: 7850 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal
printer mail-detail

Rise of the private prosecution

PPA launches voluntary code of practice for private prosecutions 

The Private Prosecutors’ Association (PPA) has launched a voluntary code of conduct, amid increasing use of private prosecutions by a wide range of victims.

Private prosecutions have been brought by victims of rape, victims of fraud, the RSPCA, Louis Vuitton (counterfeit goods), and by members of the electorate against politicians such as the new Prime Minister Boris Johnson.

While Crown Prosecutors have the Crown Prosecution Service code to work from, however, there has until now been no equivalent for private prosecutors and, as the PPA points out, private prosecutions give rise to different challenges. The PPA therefore hopes its code will help to fill the gap.

Kingsley Napley partner Melinka Berridge, executive secretary of the PPA, said: ‘Sadly, state agencies such as police and prosecutors have limited resources and need to ensure they deploy those to maximum effect, so a number of cases can slip through the cracks.

‘The code of conduct aims to ensure private prosecutors meet the high standards expected of public prosecutors.’

Technically, anyone can initiate a private prosecution, although some crimes—bribery, war crimes—can only be prosecuted by state authorities.

Another difference is that victims are usually more closely involved in private prosecutions and so their adviser (the prosecutor) has special responsibilities to them from the outset. Where it’s an economic crime, the victim may already have consulted civil lawyers who are under a duty to act in the best interests of the client but the client also needs to be aware the prosecutor’s overriding responsibility is to the court.

The code also addresses the prosecutor’s duties of disclosure, and advises on the process if the Director of Public Prosecutions receives a request to take over the case.

This year a high-profile private prosecution brought against Boris Johnson for alleged misconduct of public office was quashed by the High Court.

In 2017, safe cycling campaigners crowdfunded to bring a prosecution against a motorist for causing death by dangerous driving—the defendant was acquitted.

Issue: 7850 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Seddons GSC—Ben Marks

Seddons GSC—Ben Marks

Partner joins residential real estate team

Winckworth Sherwood—Shazia Bashir

Winckworth Sherwood—Shazia Bashir

Social housing team announces partner appointment

University of Manchester: The LLM driving tech-focused career growth

University of Manchester: The LLM driving tech-focused career growth

Manchester’s online LLM has accelerated career progression for its graduates

NEWS
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
back-to-top-scroll