AMF, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 899 (23 July 2024)

AMF, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 899 (23 July 2024)

The prosecution failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay in serving the Appeal Notice, and the strict time limits for prosecution appeals are essential to ensure certainty and fairness. The application for an extension of time was refused, and as a result, leave to appeal the terminating ruling was denied.

Citation
[2024] EWCA Crim 899
Parties
Applicant Crown: Rex; Respondent Defendant: AMF; Respondent Defendant: AZJ
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 July 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (application for Leave to Appeal a Terminating Ruling) / Application for Leave to Appeal Under S.58 Criminal Justice Act 2003
Outcome
Application for extension of time and leave to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Terminating Rulings, Appeal Procedure, Extension of Time, Historical Sexual Offences, No Case to Answer, Jury Discharge
Criminal Law Terminating Rulings Appeal Procedure Extension of Time Historical Sexual Offences No Case to Answer Jury Discharge

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Applicant Crown

AMF

Respondent Defendant

AZJ

Respondent Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (application for Leave to Appeal a Terminating Ruling) / Application for Leave to Appeal Under S.58 Criminal Justice Act 2003

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution should be granted an extension of time to serve the Appeal Notice under CPR 36.3(a)
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in ruling there was no case to answer on counts 20 to 23
  3. 3 Whether the evidence was sufficient to go to the jury on counts 20 to 23

Ratio Decidendi

The prosecution failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay in serving the Appeal Notice, and the strict time limits for prosecution appeals are essential to ensure certainty and fairness. The application for an extension of time was refused, and as a result, leave to appeal the terminating ruling was denied.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time and leave to appeal refused.

Orders

  • Respondents acquitted of counts 20 to 23 on the indictment pursuant to section 61(7) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003.
  • Fresh trial to be held on counts 1 to 19 concerning the first respondent (AMF); venue to be determined by a Presiding Judge.