Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2006] All ER (D) 37 (Apr)
Court: Queen's Bench Division (Divisional Court)
Judge:

Maurice Kay LJ and Tugendhat J

Representation David Perry (instructed by CPS Southwark Trials Unit, Bow Street Section) for the claimant.
  Stephen Field (instructed by JR Jones) for the interested party.
Judgment Dates: 4 April 2006

Catchwords

Magistrates - Committal proceedings - Committal for trial - Hearsay evidence - Justices deciding evidence insufficient on basis claimant failing to serve required notice - Whether justices erring in law - Effect of subsequent repeal of relevant legislation - Whether committal of interested party for tenth charge constituting abuse of process - Magistrates Court Act 1980, s 5D - , ss 23, 24 - .

The Case

Hearsay evidence in criminal proceedings, including magistrates' courts proceedings were, since the repeal of ss23 and 24 of the Act, governed by the . Accordingly, the justices had erred, inter alia, in basing their decision on the claimant's committal application on the failure of the claimant to serve a hearsay notice under s5D of the Magistrates Act 1980, and that decision would be quashed.

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.