header-logo header-logo

02 May 2025 / Dr Graham Zellick CBE KC FAcSS
Issue: 8114 / Categories: Opinion , Criminal
printer mail-detail

The test for referral

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

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
Digital loot may feel like property, but civil law is not always convinced. In NLJ this week, Paul Schwartfeger of 36 Stone and Nadia Latti of CMS examine fraud involving platform-controlled digital assets, from ‘account takeover and asset stripping’ to ‘value laundering’
Lasting powers of attorney (LPAs) are not ‘set and forget’ documents. In this week's NLJ, Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell urges practitioners to review LPAs every five years and after major life changes
back-to-top-scroll