Khatibi v Director of Public Prosecutions

Khatibi v Director of Public Prosecutions

The magistrates were entitled to adjourn for further evidence after retiring to consider the continuity submission, the delay did not prejudice the Appellant's fair trial rights, and there was sufficient evidence for a reasonable bench to find that the blood analysed was that of the Appellant.

Parties
Appellant/defendant: Ann Lesley Khatibi; Respondent/claimant: Director of Public Prosecutions
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 January 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal by Way of Case Stated From Magistrates Court Conviction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Forensic Evidence, Continuity of Evidence, Adjournment Discretion, Fair Trial Under Article 6 ECHR
Criminal Law Evidence Admissibility of Forensic Evidence Continuity of Evidence Adjournment Discretion Fair Trial Under Article 6 ECHR

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 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ann Lesley Khatibi

Appellant/defendant

Director of Public Prosecutions

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal by Way of Case Stated From Magistrates Court Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether magistrates were right to adjourn the case for further evidence after retiring to consider continuity submission
  2. 2 Whether magistrates were right to continue with the trial after a five-month adjournment
  3. 3 Whether there was evidence upon which a reasonable bench could find that the blood analysed was that of the Appellant

Ratio Decidendi

The magistrates were entitled to adjourn for further evidence after retiring to consider the continuity submission, the delay did not prejudice the Appellant's fair trial rights, and there was sufficient evidence for a reasonable bench to find that the blood analysed was that of the Appellant.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The conviction stands
  • No breach of Article 6 ECHR