XFV, R. v [2026] EWCA Crim 287 (19 February 2026)

XFV, R. v [2026] EWCA Crim 287 (19 February 2026)

The grounds of appeal against conviction were without merit as the trial was conducted fairly, the applicant's case was properly presented, and no procedural or evidential errors rendered the conviction unsafe. The sentences imposed were justified given the seriousness, breach of trust, and campaign nature of the offending, and the total sentence was just and proportionate in accordance with the totality principle. Accordingly, the application for extension of time to appeal conviction was refused, and the appeal against sentence was dismissed.

Citation
[2026] EWCA Crim 287
Parties
Prosecution: Rex; Applicant/defendant: XFV
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 February 2026
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Applications for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Conviction and Sentence, and Substantive Appeal on Sentence
Outcome
Application for extension of time to appeal conviction refused; application for extension of time and leave to appeal sentence granted; appeal against sentence dismissed.
Legal Topics
Sexual Offences, Appeals Against Conviction, Appeals Against Sentence, Sentencing Guidelines, Totality Principle, Sexual Harm Prevention Orders, Restraining Orders
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Appeals Against Conviction Appeals Against Sentence Sentencing Guidelines Totality Principle Sexual Harm Prevention Orders Restraining Orders

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

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

XFV

Applicant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Applications for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Conviction and Sentence, and Substantive Appeal on Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conviction is unsafe due to alleged procedural and evidential errors
  2. 2 Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive and failed to properly account for totality and mitigation

Ratio Decidendi

The grounds of appeal against conviction were without merit as the trial was conducted fairly, the applicant's case was properly presented, and no procedural or evidential errors rendered the conviction unsafe. The sentences imposed were justified given the seriousness, breach of trust, and campaign nature of the offending, and the total sentence was just and proportionate in accordance with the totality principle. Accordingly, the application for extension of time to appeal conviction was refused, and the appeal against sentence was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time to appeal conviction refused; application for extension of time and leave to appeal sentence granted; appeal against sentence dismissed.

Orders

  • Sexual Harm Prevention Order imposed until further order
  • Restraining Orders imposed for five years for each complainant