| Source: | All England Reporter |
| Publisher Citation: | [2003] All ER (D) 173 (Jan) |
| Court: | Administrative Court |
| Judge: | Henriques J |
| Representation | Carolyn Gardiner (instructed by Harris Cuffaro & Nichols) for the appellant. |
| Rupert Overbury (instructed by the Crown Prosecution Service) for the prosecution. | |
| Judgment Dates: | 22 January 2003 |
Catchwords
Criminal procedure - Appeal - Fairness - Absence of defendant - Discretion of judge to continue trial - s 79(3) - s 122.
The Case
In any case where it appeared to the Crown Court sitting in an appellate capacity that an appellant was not attending in spite of being obliged to do so, but was represented by counsel, the proper course was for the court to hear the appeal in the absence of the appellant. It had therefore not been open to the Crown Court in the instant case to conclude that the appellant was wilfully frustrating the course of proceedings by his repeated absences and thereafter to dismiss the appeal.
If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.
Lexis®Library
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary
