Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2002] All ER (D) 96 (Oct)
Court: Court of Appeal, Criminal Division
Judge:

Kay LJ, Wright and Henriques JJ

Representation Kim Hollis QC and Navjot Sidhu (instructed by J D Spicer & Co) for the defendant.
  Andrew Munday QC (instructed by the Crown Prosecution Service) for the Crown.
Judgment Dates: 8 October 2002

Catchwords

Criminal law - Re-trial - Application for leave to arraign - Defendant not having been arraigned within two months from date of order for re-trial - Prosecution making application for leave to arraign out of time - Defence making cross-application for verdict of acquittal - Whether prosecution having acted with all due expedition in circumstances - Whether leave to arraign out of time should be given - s 8(1)(a), (b).

The Case

On an application for leave to arraign a defendant under s8(1)(a) of the Criminal Appeal Act, the court would not give leave unless it was satisfied that the prosecution had acted with all due expedition. In the circumstances of the instant case the prosecution had acted with all due expedition and leave to arraign was granted.

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