header-logo header-logo

The test for referral

02 May 2025 / Professor Graham Zellick CBE KC
Issue: 8114 / Categories: Opinion , Criminal
printer mail-detail
217357
Professor Graham Zellick KC, the Criminal Cases Review Commission’s second chairman, argues that the Law Commission’s proposal is wrong

From almost my first day as chairman of the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) in 2003 and throughout my five years in post, I found myself having to defend the statutory test for referral of a case to the relevant appeal court. There was much wrong with the CCRC in those days, to which I put my shoulder, but the referral test was not among the problems, then or now.

The criticisms, however, have persisted, culminating in the Law Commission’s provisional view in its consultation paper on Criminal Appeals (CP 268, 27 February 2025, Chap 11) that it should be replaced, reflecting the views of all but one of the 35 respondents to their earlier issues paper. Only the Crown Prosecution Service (unlikely to want to see any relaxation in the threshold for referral) pronounced the test satisfactory.

The test, found in s 13(1) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1995,

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll