Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2002] All ER (D) 265 (Jan)
Court: Divisional Court
Judge:

Lord Woolf CJ and Bell J

Representation Martin Picton (instructed by Russell Jones & Walker, Newcastle upon Tyne) for the appellant.
  Robin Patton (instructed by Crown Prosecution Service, Newcastle upon Tyne) for the prosecution.
Judgment Dates: 30 January 2002

Catchwords

Criminal law - Computer - Misuse of computer - Unauthorised access to computer - Appellant using non open access computer belonging to university to access world wide web - Evidence before justices that appellant knew he was not authorised to access the web through those computers - Approach to be used by justices when considering evidence - Divisional Court determining decision of justices to convict appellant correct - Appellant not present or represented at hearing of appeal - Court directing order not to be drawn up for 21 days to allow appellant to be informed of decision and for him to have opportunity to make representations - Appellant instructing counsel to advance further arguments on his behalf - Whether previous decision to stand - .

The Case

Following the delivery of an ex tempore judgment (see the court directed that as the appellant had not been present or represented the order would not be drawn up for 21 days. Within that period the appellant communicated with the court indicating that he wished to instruct counsel to advance arguments on his behalf. Those arguments were considered and rejected by the court who ruled that the previous decision would stand.

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