203 Important cases examined and summarised between 2015 - 2021 - Cost £100 plus VAT

CASE - LAW 2021


Plaku,Plaku ,Bourdon and the Queen and in the matter of a Reference by Her Majesty’s Attorney General pursuant to Section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 and Benjamin Smith (a consideration by the Court of Appeal of the case-law and guidance from the Sentencing Council surrounding the issue of credit upon indication of guilt)

Regina and Umerji (a consideration by the Court of Appeal of the previous authorities concerning the issue of whether or not a defendant could be sent to the Crown Court for trial by the Magistrates’ under Section 51 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 if absent from the proceedings but represented by a lawyer in the case)

Chipunza and Regina (an interesting read in which the Court of Appeal gave us its insight on the considerations for a jury (or a bench of Magistrates’ or a District Judge for that matter) in deciding whether or not a burglary of a hotel room was a burglary of a dwelling or a burglary of a non-dwelling).



Regina v Roland (Consideration of whether or not a sentence should be suspended – causing death by careless driving)

Regina v Davison (A Crown Court Judge explaining why the sentence was 2 and a half times that of the appropriate guideline sentence)

Regina v McQueen (The Court of Appeal restoring full credit because the defendant had not had an opportunity to plead guilty to this earlier in the proceedings)

Regina v H (The Court of Appeal making the point that the Release of Prisoners (Alteration of Relevant Proportion of Sentence) Order 2020 was not an inherent part of the sentence)

Regina v Brodie (Another case dealing with extensions and uplifts/adjustments to a disqualification from driving where custody was also imposed)

Regina v Shehu (Another example of the Court of Appeal making a ‘loss of time direction’ in an unmeritorious appeal)

Regina v Colecozy-Rogers (An interesting case of bad character in which the character of the defendant went in to assist the jury on the issue of credibility in circumstances where part of the defence case involved an attack upon the character of the deceased)

Regina v Sule (the Court of Appeal making the point, yet again, about a plea at the PTPH and credit of 25%)

Regina v Robson (The Court of Appeal making the point that a harsher sentence cannot be imposed after a conviction on a re-trial than that which had been imposed at the original trial)

Regina v Palmer (an examination by the Court of Appeal of extensions and uplifts concerning disqualification from driving)

Regina v Johnstone (the Court of Appeal considering the position where the sentence had been imposed at the Crown Court, albeit the wrong committal Section had been used at the Magistrates’ Court stage)

Regina v Brunton (the Court of Appeal looking at suspended sentences and the periods for which a suspension may operate)

Regina v Everson (the Court of Appeal considering, amongst other things, the interrelationship between Schedules 21 of 22 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003)

R v Bracani (an important case in which the Court of Appeal considered that case workers of the SCA were not experts)

Regina v Palmer (another case in which the Court of Appeal considered it appropriate to make a ‘loss of time’ order)

Eslick and Regina (the Court of Appeal reminding us of the test where there is an appeal on the basis of disparity of sentencing between co-defendants)

R v T (the Court of Appeal considering the appropriate way of dealing with a Crown Court case where the proceedings in that Court were a nullity because of irregularities at the committal for sentence stage)

Regina v Collins (a fascinating read concerning the point at which a defendant becomes eligible to apply for parole – those parts of the sentence for which no application can be made before two thirds has expired and those parts of the sentence for which no application can be made before 50% has expired)

Regina v Behdarvani-Aidi (the Court of Appeal greatly increasing the sentence following two convictions for rape – Attorney General’s Reference – unduly lenient sentence)

Campbell and the Crown Prosecution Service (the High Court looking at the issue of whether or not assaults on emergency workers (police officers) required that the police officer was acting in the execution of his or her duty at the time)

Regina v Parker (the Court of Appeal, yet again, having to re-adjust a sentence to take account of the fact that the defendant had been subject to a Qualifying Curfew)

Gould, Moffat, Brown, Mugenzi and the Queen (a very long and interesting judgement on the Crown Court becoming a Magistrates’ Court under Section 66 of the Courts Act 2003 – the Court of Appeal reminding everyone that magisterial law is complex and needs to be followed)

Regina v The Highgate Magistrates’ ex parte Riley (an interesting read concerning apparent bias based upon the wording of the intervention by the Lady Chairman of the Magistrates’)

Regina v Devonport (a consideration of a ‘loss of time’ order by the Court of Appeal)

Regina v Tekocak (the Court of Appeal considering the mandatory extension of a disqualification from driving when both a disqualification and custody are imposed)

Regina v Kader (the Court of Appeal considering Covid-19 as a sentencing issue)

R v Bedward (another case in which the Court of Appeal considered whether or not text messages were hearsay)


Regina v Sheikh (the Crown Court judge was dealing with substantial matters of case management and therefore the fee payable to the solicitors was a trial fee and not a cracked trial fee)

Regina and Jason Lawrance (this case concerned an issue which has been dealt with before, namely, is it RAPE if sexual intercourse takes place which is conditional (in this case the condition being that the man concerned had had a vasectomy) when, in fact, the statement about his fertility was a lie and the condition was therefore not present?)

A and Regina (this case concerned the sentences that are available to a Crown Court judge when dealing with certain ‘offenders of particular concern’ – an ordinarily Determinate Sentence is not one of the options available to a Crown Court judge)

R (on the application of BB) and West Glamorgan Youth Court and CPS (a case concerning the lawfulness of allocating a Youth Court case to the Crown Court as a result of the limited sentencing options available in the Youth Court)

Regina v RB JS and HG (the correct approach when sentencing children or young people – find the appropriate relevant length of sentence for an adult – deduct whatever percentage should be deducted to reflect the youth of the offender and, as the final stage, deduct from that figure any reduction that needs to be made concerning credit for the stage at which the plea was indicated or taken)

The Queen and Lee Hodgin (a case in which the Court of Appeal had to consider the issue of whether or not the Crown Court judge should have given full credit of one third rather than 25% where there had been an indication at the Magistrates’ Court that it was likely to be a guilty plea)

R (Khan) v Secretary of state (A case in the High Court in which the Claimant sought a Declaration that Section 247A of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (which was inserted by the Terrorist Offenders (Restriction of Early Release) Act 2020) was incompatible with Articles 5, 7 and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights)

Ali and the DPP (an appeal by way of case stated in the High Court which raised questions as to the presumption of reliability of an alcohol breath test machine and the burden and standard of proof to be applied when evidence of unreliability is sought to be adduced)

The Queen on the application of C and the DPP and the National Crime Agency and for others (EncroCHAT – the distilled ‘essence’ of a complicated judgement in a series of bullet points)

The Queen on the applications of the DPP (Claimant) and Crown Court at Woolwich (Defendant) and Tesfa Young-Williams, HM Courts and Tribunal Service, the Lord Chancellor (as Interested Parties)  

Jayano Lucima (Claimant) and the Central Criminal Court (Defendant) and Crown Prosecution Service, the Lord Chancellor (as Interested Parties)

Two unconnected claims for Judicial Review raising issues about the correct approach in the criminal courts to applications to extend custody time limits during the Covid-19 pandemic)

Regina v Williamson (a case concerning whether or not it was right for the judge to reduce credit even though the guilty plea had been entered at the PTPH in circumstances where the defendant had been requisitioned to attend court and had failed to do so and had to be arrested on a warrant)

Attorney General’s Reference (No. 1 of 2020) (sexual assault – is it an objective or subjective test?)

Jenkins and the DPP and Portsmouth Magistrates’ Court (a driver who continued to drive a motor vehicle, whilst being aware that a passenger had placed a stun-gun in the glove box, was in joint possession of that item – a fairly useful reminder of the principles if you are prosecuting)

Regina v Salih and another (whether a micro SD card smuggled into prison should be categorised as a Class B or class C article when it meets the definition for both Class B and Class C)

Regina v Wangige (the Court of Appeal considering the question of whether or not a prosecution for causing death by dangerous driving had offended the principle of autrefois convict where the defendant had previously been prosecuted for a number of offences arising out of the same incident)

CB and SM and the Queen (the Court of Appeal considering various issues relating to the retention, inspection, copying, disclosure and deletion of the electronic records held by prosecution witnesses)

CC and the CPS (a High Court decision in which permission was sought to challenge, by way of Judicial Review, a decision of the CPS not to prosecute)

R. v. Manning (Attorney General's reference unduly lenient sentence)

David Barton/Rosemary Booth and the Queen (The current test for dishonesty)

Regina v Jeffrey Spencer (Refusal to disclose the PIN)

Chelsea Football Club Ltd and Gary Nichols and AP (Imprisonment/COVID 19)

[2020] EWHC 452 (Admin) (consideration of the bail status of a defendant appearing on a requisition)

Regina v Daniel Harvey (the case considered the meaning of the words ‘Where 2 or more offences are charged on the same occasion’ when dealing with theft by way of low-value shoplifting)

The Queen on the application of X (a consideration of Section 102 (5) of the PCC (S) A 2000 – the circumstances in which the Secretary of State can apply to the Court for an extended period of detention on a Detention and Training Order)


Regina v Garthwaite (Incorrect committal for sentence sections)

Jones and the CPS and Croydon (CC can re-visit sentence on dismissing appeal against conviction)

Regina v Baty (no compensation following RTA where driver insured – Section 130 PCC (S) A 2000)

Regina v Bennett (imprisonment wrong – defendant was 18 – no reference to Draft Guidelines!)

Regina v George and Ingram (CC Judge entitled to re-visit sentence under Section 155 PCC(S) A 2000)

R v McPartland and Grant (mobile phones and ‘reasonable lines of enquiry’ in a sexual investigation)

R v Sohal (bad character and hearsay issues)

Regina v Williamson (appealing convictions on counts on an indictment at different stages)

DPP and Walsall and Lincoln Magistrates’ (another excellent read for the CPS on disclosure issues)

Regina v Yasin (credit on a guilty plea)

Regina v Brian L (the sections to be used on a sending/committal for sentence)

Regina v Walker (bad character evidence and possible exclusion – breach of Code D)

Regina v Martin (identification evidence)

Chesterfield Poultry Limited (time limits re commencement of proceedings)

The Queen on the App of the DPP....... (JR – disclosure of unused material in a speeding case)

DPP and Barreto (mobile phone used to film an accident was driving)

DPP and Giles (the need for a Newton hearing in disputed homophobic aggravation of ABH)

Regina v Kidd (raising self-defence is not necessarily an attack whereby character admissible)

R v Coker (differences between Section 4 (3 (b) and Section 4 (3) (c) Misuse of Drugs Act 1971

R v Brown (admissibility of a car registration number – res Gestae – Section 114 (1) (d) CJA 2003

R v Ridgeway (bad character evidence concerning the offence of intercourse with a horse)

R v Burrows (Section 22A – theft by way of low-value shoplifting cannot be count on the indictment)

R v IB (disclosure to defence of fraud of complainant post conviction-affect upon safety)

Lamaletie and R (self-defence – on the facts – attack upon character – bad character admissible)

R and C (a consideration of Section 116 (5) (a) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003)

R v SJ and MM (it will be rare for a Counsellor to be deemed an expert witness in the proceedings)

R v Eljack and Latif (the statement of a witness was read because he was unfit to testify)

Regina v AH (the statement of a witness was read because she was too fearful to testify)

Regina v Halliday (Section 41 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 – amongst others)

R v Spottiswood (introduction of bad character evidence – the use of a headlock on the victim)

James William Brown and the DPP (issue date of a requisition/single justice procedure notice)

DPP and McFarlane (service of new charges by email upon solicitors)

R v McGarrick (assault upon an emergency worker) 

R v Walton (3 strikes burglary and sending to the Crown Court)

R v Meade (credit when sentencing under a ‘strikes rule’)

R v M (the clarity of clauses within a Criminal Behaviour Order)

R v Douglas (the 4 year rule when sentencing under the dangerous offender provisions)

R v Davids (indications on the PET form and the effect upon credit)

R v Potter (powers of the Crown Court on breach of a Magistrates’ Court Criminal Behaviour Order)

R v Dayib (sentencing errors at the Crown Court when dealing with a youth)

R v Brindle (sentencing errors at the Crown Court when dealing with summary offences)

R v Khan (minimum period of extension on the licence when sentencing a dangerous offender)

Regina v Sallah (the start of a criminal trial – issues of ‘substantial case management’)

R v Green (Section 34 of the CJPOA 1994 – adverse inferences)

Regina v D (terminating ruling – cut-throat razor – folding pocket knife exemption)

R v Hashi (overarching principles – the sentencing of children and young people – quantum)

National Probation Service v the Crown Court sitting at Blackfriars and Others (community orders)

The Queen on the application of Parashar v Sunderland Magistrates’ Court (adjournments)

R v Cheeseman (the householders defence – availability to servicemen)

Regina and PY (the exemption provision under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991)

Regina and A (custodial sentence for a youth and deduction of time by the institution)


Regina v Growcoot (bad character applications concerning the complainant and the defendant)

The Queen and E (seizure of a mobile phone as a reasonable line of enquiry)

MK and Regina and Gega and Regina (the defence under the Modern Slavery Act 2015)

Regina and EK (substantial injustice warranting exceptional leave to appeal out of time)

Randell and the DPP (the PET form – witness at court – statement read as hearsay)

Richardson and the DPP (Crown to prove that the public used a place with lawful permission)

R v Harvey (co- defendants blaming each other – bad character of both put before the jury)

R v Sereika (sometimes only a proportion of the images on the disc will be the actual PPE)

R v Frempong (page count to be based upon the PDF document not the Excel format)

R v Blair (reduction of the suspended term to reflect completed hours of unpaid work)

R v Fender (introduction of bad character to correct false impression – ‘I don’t like gangs’) 

The Queen on the Application of Suraj Rathor (the correctness of proceeding to ‘try’ in absence)

R v Hussain (defendant excluded from the trial – the fairness of proceeding in absence)

Regina v Kieron Knight (admissions in a police station interview – relationship to credit)

Regina v Richard Jones (adult offenders of ‘particular concern’)

Valiati and the DPP and KM and the DPP (hearsay statements on the PET form – admissibility) 

Regina v Jedran (moped used as a weapon therefore armed robbery when billing the case)

Regina and Kirk Rochester (still a psychoactive substance even though ‘indirect effect’)

Regina v Chad John Greatbatch (8 year extension on the licence only permissible in sexual offences)

Regina v Lewis Ford (a catalogue of errors when dealing with a 17-year-old who turned 18)

The Queen and Welland (the correctness of proceeding with trial in absence – defendant ‘fitting’)

Regina v Boyle (mandatory minimum sentences for firearms and exceptional circumstances)

R v AM and KU (community service – the lawfulness of an application to extend after 12 months)

Regina v O’ Connor (the Judge increasing the sentence within 56 days under the slip rule)


R v R (K) (appeal against the severity of the sentence on a youth – sentencing guidelines)

R v Sowerby (dangerousness – EDS – matter for the Judge not the psychiatrist)

R v Lawman (lawyers criticised yet again for making reference to draft guidelines)

Dougall and the CPS (amending an either-way charge to a summary one, the pre-requisites)

The Queen on the Application of Lucy Poskitt (various points including re-openings)

Begum and Begum (Appellants) and Luton Borough Council (Respondent) (laying an information)

R v Daugintis,R v Cvetkovas,R v Liumas (PPE - another PDF over Excel Spreadsheet case)

The DPP and Sugden (officer refreshing his memory from a copy of the form MG DD/A permissible)

Lord Howard of Lympne and the DPP (a Section 172 notice – furnishing details of the driver)

Lord Howard of Lympne and the DPP (costs)


R (on the Application of Stott) (Appellant) v Sec of State for Justice (Respondent) (EDS and Article 14)

R v Reid (clear directions on the intent/foresight/participation of getaway driver required – Jogee)

R v Gregory (Sections 35A and B of the RTOA 1988/Sections 147A and B of the PCC (S) A 2000)

Decani (Claimant) and the City of London Magistrates’ Ct (Mag’s wrong to grant adjournment to CPS)

DPP and Camp (so drunk that you could not provide a specimen of breath – not reasonable excuse)

R v Tuka (‘exceptional circumstances’ found by the Court of Appeal in a firearms case)

AG’s Ref – Sec 36 CJA 1988 – R v Abbas (Sections 35A and 35B RTOA 1988 considered)

AG’s Ref – Sec 36 CJA 1988 – Regina v Armstrong (sentence more than doubled)

Regina v McDonagh (Court of Appeal reducing sentence to reflect unpaid work performed)

Regina and Dean Malcolm Lewis and James Marshall- Gunn (Joint Principals – Jogee not relevant)

Travis Green and Regina (Judges should refrain from giving ‘good character’ ref’s for witnesses)

Ali (Claimant) and the Crown Court at Kingston (Defendant) (matters on indictment – JR)

R (DPP) and Aylesbury CC and AB (interested party) (CPS not liable in costs for failings of expert)

R v Rahal (an appeal against the amount of costs ordered to the London Borough of Southwark)

DPP v Patterson (dishonesty – the case of Ivy to take precedence over the case of Gosh)

R v McCall (causing serious injury by dangerous driving – serving police officer)

R v Ray (the householders defence – may be disproportionate if reasonable in the circumstances)

R v Cook (AG’s Ref – sentence doubled – 62-year-old man – good character – 6 years rather than 3)

R v Stapleford (evidence to correct a false impression ‘a member of the Bar of England and Wales’)

Regina v Michael O’ Rourke and another (PDF or Excel – in this case Excel)

R v Chapman and Others (nitrous oxide with intent to supply – look to the circumstances of the case)

Julie Wright and Reading CC (a person may keep a dog without actual physical possession of it)

PF and Regina (doli incapax must be rebutted by evidence other than evidence of the crime itself)

DPP and Jane Distill (garden part of the dwelling for the purposes of Section 5 POA 1986)

Dean Christopher Maxwell (a catalogue of sentencing errors in a Crown Court case)

R (on the Application of Tyrone Cardin) and Birmingham CC (the Bail (Amendment (Act) 1993)

DPP and Salford Magistrates’ Court and John Blakeley (an excellent read for the CPS on disclosure)

The Queen on the App of M v Hammersmith Magistrates’ Ct (‘Merton Compliant age assessment’)

R (DPP) v Stratford Magistrates’ Court and Others (wilful obstruction of the highway)

The Queen on the Application of Hassani (every imaginable point taken in a drink drive case)

DPP v Melvyne John Woods (DJ revisited/reversed decision of legal team manager to vacate a trial)

Hudson v Crown Prosecution Service (an unoccupied place may still be a dwelling)

Regina v Luck – CC at the Central Criminal Court (Counsel electing the deduction from the 1st trial)

The Sec of State –The Lord Chancellor v SVS Sol’s (PPE where evidence served in digital format)

R v Vasey (a Court of Appeal decision dealing with the appropriateness of suspended imprisonment)

Westminster City Council v Owadally and another (E/W offences – plea’s to be entered by def)

JS (a child) and the DPP (DNA found on a moped – justices’ reasons for convicting flawed)

R v Turk (indictment no longer legally valid where the defendant had died)

Regina v Walsh – Crown Court at Chester (the absence of the disc not fatal to a claim)

R v Coles – Crown Court at Cardiff (substantial matters of case management – trial fee payable)

R v Riddell (self defence might be available on a count of dangerous or careless driving – rare!)

R v Johnson (conveying a package into prison – ‘mens rea’ – something prohibited)

R v Warren (an examination of the slip rule – Section 155 of the PCC (S) A 2000)

Lord Chancellor and Edward Hayes LLP and Nick Wrack (a really important case on PPE – disc)

R (TL) and the Chief Constable of Surrey Police (the necessity for an arrest - criteria considered)

R v Ordu (substantial injustice warranting exceptional leave to appeal out of time)

R v Rashid (an interesting case on the use of an intermediary during a Crown Court trial)



Ivey (Appellant) v Genting Casinos (the Supreme Court reminding us of the test for dishonesty)

R v Beech and Others (Judge ordering passengers to take extended re-test)

R v Thelwall (3 points – Guidelines not case-law – online articles – never! – issue of costs)

Regina v Christopher Henderson (defendant in a flat – lock knife in the boot of car – not ‘with him’)

Regina and Lewis Johnson and Others (Court of Appeal reconsidering cases following Jogee)

Regina v Mehmood and Horvathova (counsel entitled to cracked trial fee and trial fee)

DPP v SK (performing community service work for someone else is perverting the course of justice)

Regina v John Coleman (CC costs – re-determination by Magistrates’ – not a matter for CA)

R v Mitchell (bad character – previous incidents not resulting in charges may still show a propensity)

Regina v Ian Tucker (item not an Offensive Weapon per se – uses it – this is not possession of OW)

R v Andrews (Court Appointments to cross-examine – consideration of when the appointment ends)

Regina v Aqib Aslam (court always to consider compliance with the community order imposed)

CPS v Danny Cipriani (drink drive – a trial should not ‘descend into a game of smoke and mirrors’)

R (Robson) v CPS (High Court will intervene if a decision maker fetters his/her discretion)

Regina v Lennon (costs decision – both solicitor advocate and advocate each entitled to their fee)

R v LF and DS (offenders of particular concern – determinate sentence +1 year fixed licence)

Ibrahim v CPS (evidence of the phone call admitted, quite rightly, under the res gestae principle)

Regina v Morfitt (costs decision – consideration of whether a Newton hearing had taken place)

Regina v Arash Zaredar (the defence under Section 31 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999)

B and Leeds CC and CPS (when sentencing a youth – give thought to the max available to adult) 

Paul Maurice Needham (the leading judgement on Sections 35A and B of the RTOA 1988)

R (Cuns) v Hammersmith Magistrates’ Court (a needle phobic must put the issue ‘in play’ at trial)

R v Tai (costs decision – possession of a knuckle duster meant it was ‘armed robbery’ for billing)

R (Ewing) v Cardiff CC (members of the public are free to take notes – no prior authority required)

Henderson v CPS (wrong to convict on the underlying offences and the aggravating ones as well)

Jogee; Ruddock and the Queen (the Supreme Court defining ‘joint enterprise’)

R v Taylor (Appellant) (Supreme Court – driver must have been ‘at fault’ – Aggravated vehicle taking)

Regina v Raymond Martin Marshall.... (Qualifying Curfews – advocates to address the court)



R v Darkwa (C C Judge can sentence for an either-way offence with consecutive for summary)

Abbas v CPS (a consideration of the extent of Court Appointments)

Thomas v CPS (defendant has entitlement to apply for bail pending appeal)

Higgins v The CPS (consideration of evidence admitted under the res gestae exception to hearsay)