AB v R.

AB v R.

The convictions were unsafe due to the combined effect of inadequate and confusing jury directions on good character and cross-admissibility, lack of written directions, and the emergence of fresh evidence undermining the credibility of a key prosecution witness. These deficiencies meant the jury could not be sure of the essential legal principles and the reliability of the evidence supporting the convictions.

Parties
Appellant: A. B.; Respondent: The Queen
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 May 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal allowed, convictions quashed, retrial ordered
Legal Topics
Sexual Offences, Good Character Directions, Cross Admissibility of Evidence, Jury Directions, Fresh Evidence on Appeal
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Good Character Directions Cross Admissibility of Evidence Jury Directions Fresh Evidence on Appeal

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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A. B.

Appellant

The Queen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge gave adequate directions to the jury on the appellant's good character and cross-admissibility of evidence between complainants
  2. 2 Whether the judge's summing up and directions rendered the convictions unsafe
  3. 3 Whether the late emergence and credibility of evidence from a key witness (Ms Ferrary) undermined the safety of the convictions

Ratio Decidendi

The convictions were unsafe due to the combined effect of inadequate and confusing jury directions on good character and cross-admissibility, lack of written directions, and the emergence of fresh evidence undermining the credibility of a key prosecution witness. These deficiencies meant the jury could not be sure of the essential legal principles and the reliability of the evidence supporting the convictions.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed, convictions quashed, retrial ordered

Orders

  • Convictions quashed
  • Retrial ordered