A v R [2012] EWCA Crim 434 (13 March 2012)

A v R [2012] EWCA Crim 434 (13 March 2012)

The conviction was safe because the appellant's conduct—deliberately and falsely retracting truthful allegations of rape—fell within the offence of perverting the course of justice, and no viable defence of duress was available on the facts. The decision to prosecute was not an abuse of process, and the subsequent CPS guidance did not retrospectively affect the lawfulness of the conviction.

Citation
[2012] EWCA Crim 434
Parties
Appellant: A; Respondent: R
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 March 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction Following Guilty Plea
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction upheld
Legal Topics
Perverting the Course of Justice, False Retraction of Allegations, Duress, Prosecutorial Discretion, Domestic Violence, Rape, Abuse of Process
Criminal Law Perverting the Course of Justice False Retraction of Allegations Duress Prosecutorial Discretion Domestic Violence Rape Abuse of Process

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

Parties

A

Appellant

R

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction Following Guilty Plea

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conviction for perverting the course of justice was unsafe due to duress or prosecutorial error
  2. 2 Whether the retraction of a true complaint can constitute perverting the course of justice
  3. 3 Whether the appellant had a viable defence of duress

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction was safe because the appellant's conduct—deliberately and falsely retracting truthful allegations of rape—fell within the offence of perverting the course of justice, and no viable defence of duress was available on the facts. The decision to prosecute was not an abuse of process, and the subsequent CPS guidance did not retrospectively affect the lawfulness of the conviction.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction upheld