header-logo header-logo

22 April 2016 / Polly Dyer
Issue: 7695 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Steering the right (disclosure) course

001_nlj_7695_dyer

Polly Dyer reviews the conclusions of a Court of Appeal master class in the proper approach to disclosure & abuse of process

Publication of the redacted judgment in R v R & Others [2015] EWCA Crim 1941, [2016] All ER (D) 06 (Jan) in December gave practitioners an excellent overview of the current law and practice on the disclosure of unused material in the prosecution’s possession, as well as guidance on the proper approach to disclosure and abuse of process.

Background

During the course of the investigation of this matter a number of electronic devices had been seized, such that the prosecution held some seven terabytes of data. The prosecution evidence had long since been served but five years had passed without the case progressing beyond an argument regarding whether the prosecution had complied with their duties of initial disclosure. Ultimately, the judge stayed the prosecution in respect of all counts of a draft indictment (which had not reached the stage of being preferred) as an abuse of process. The prosecution applied for

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

Freeths—Heather Gibson

Freeths—Heather Gibson

Freeths strengthens national tax team with Heather Gibson appointment

Debevoise & Plimpton—Mary Lavelle

Debevoise & Plimpton—Mary Lavelle

Debevoise expands London secondaries team with addition of Mary Lavelle

Excello Law—Hestia Private Client

Excello Law—Hestia Private Client

Excello Law welcomes ex-Irwin Mitchell team to launch Hestia Private Client

NEWS
Lawyers have welcomed plans to create specialist rape and serious sex offences courtrooms at every Crown Court
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
back-to-top-scroll