Acr, R. v [2025] EWCA Crim 1220 (30 July 2025)

Acr, R. v [2025] EWCA Crim 1220 (30 July 2025)

The trial judge erred in law and principle by withdrawing count 1 from the jury, as there was evidence from which a properly directed jury could infer the defendant derived sexual gratification from the presence of his child. The judge's ruling usurped the jury's role and was not reasonable in the circumstances. The case should have been left to the jury for determination.

Citation
[2025] EWCA Crim 1220
Parties
Applicant Prosecution: Rex; Respondent Defendant: ACR
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 July 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (prosecution Application for Leave to Appeal) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Application for Leave to Appeal Against Trial Judge's Ruling Under S.58 Criminal Justice Act 2003
Outcome
Prosecution's application for leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; judge's ruling reversed; new trial on count 1 directed.
Legal Topics
Sexual Offences, Appeals, No Case to Answer, Judicial Directions, Reporting Restrictions
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Appeals No Case to Answer Judicial Directions Reporting Restrictions

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Applicant Prosecution

ACR

Respondent Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (prosecution Application for Leave to Appeal) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Application for Leave to Appeal Against Trial Judge's Ruling Under S.58 Criminal Justice Act 2003

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in withdrawing count 1 (engaging in sexual activity in the presence of a child) from the jury under section 11(1) Sexual Offences Act 2003
  2. 2 Whether the judge's ruling was unreasonable or involved an error of law or principle
  3. 3 Whether the prosecution adduced sufficient evidence for the jury to infer the necessary element of sexual gratification from the presence of the child

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge erred in law and principle by withdrawing count 1 from the jury, as there was evidence from which a properly directed jury could infer the defendant derived sexual gratification from the presence of his child. The judge's ruling usurped the jury's role and was not reasonable in the circumstances. The case should have been left to the jury for determination.

Court Disposition

Prosecution's application for leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; judge's ruling reversed; new trial on count 1 directed.

Orders

  • Proceedings in the Crown Court to be resumed; new trial on count 1 to be held at a different Crown Court centre before a different judge.
  • Prosecution to arrange a hearing to fix a trial date as soon as possible.