O'Shea v City of Coventry Magistrates' Court & Anor

The computer printout evidence was admissible as real evidence because it was generated by a machine without human intervention. There was sufficient evidence to connect the claimant to the offences based on his credit card and email address. The acts constituted incitement of the human operators behind the business, not merely a machine, and thus disclosed an offence.

Parties: Claimant: Anthony David O'Shea; First Defendant: City of Coventry Magistrates' Court; Second Defendant: The Crown Prosecution Service
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 05 April 2004
Procedural Posture: Judicial Review / Judgment on Application for Judicial Review
Outcome: Application for judicial review refused
Legal Topics: Admissibility of Computer Evidence, Hearsay, Incitement, Sufficiency of Evidence

Criminal Law Evidence Judicial Review Admissibility of Computer Evidence Hearsay Incitement Sufficiency of Evidence

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Anthony David O'Shea

Claimant

City of Coventry Magistrates' Court

First Defendant

The Crown Prosecution Service

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment on Application for Judicial Review

Legal Issues

1 Whether computer printout evidence was admissible as real evidence or hearsay
2 Whether there was sufficient evidence to justify committal
3 Whether the evidence disclosed the commission of an offence of incitement or attempted incitement

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Application for judicial review refused