||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 184 (Nov)
||Queen's Bench Division (Divisional Court)
Gage LJ and Openshaw J
||Jemma Levinson (instructed by Hallmark Atkinson Wynter) for the claimants.
||Teresa Hay (instructed by the Crown Prosecution Service, Crawley) for the prosecution.
||15 November 2005
Magistrates - Adjournment - Discretion of district judge - Application by prosecution to adjourn having conceded failure to comply with disclosure obligations - District judge granting adjournment - Whether exercise of discretion irrational or perverse.
The decision of the district judge to grant an adjournment on the application of the prosecution who had admittedly failed to comply with the obligation of disclosure to the defence, was neither irrational nor perverse. He had carefully considered all the factors and had reached the conclusions that the prosecution had provided an explanation of why certain aspects of the case had not been dealt with, that an adjournment would not result in prejudice to the claimants who would still be able to have a fair trial, and that it was in the public interest that there should be an adjournment
- 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