Ben- Rejab, R. v

Ben- Rejab, R. v

The refusal to allow cross-examination on the complainant's Facebook activity was correct under section 41 YJCEA 1999, as the activity constituted sexual behaviour and was of minimal probative value. The convictions of Ben-Rejab were safe. However, the convictions of Baccar were unsafe because the late amendment of the indictment and the judge's directions on joint enterprise deprived the defence of a fair opportunity to address the new basis of liability to the jury, resulting in potential unfairness.

Parties
Appellant: Anouar Ben-Rejab; Appellant: Nizar Baccar; Respondent: Regina (The Crown)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 April 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Ben-Rejab's appeal against conviction dismissed; Baccar's appeal against conviction allowed; retrial ordered for Baccar on counts 2 and 3; application for leave to appeal sentence by Ben-Rejab refused.
Legal Topics
Rape, Sexual Assault, Joint Enterprise, Amendment of Indictment, Cross Examination of Complainant, Section 41 Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999, Fair Trial, Unsafe Conviction
Criminal Law Rape Sexual Assault Joint Enterprise Amendment of Indictment Cross Examination of Complainant Section 41 Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 Fair Trial +1 more

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anouar Ben-Rejab

Appellant

Nizar Baccar

Appellant

Regina (The Crown)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in refusing leave to cross-examine the complainant about her Facebook activity under section 41 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999
  2. 2 Whether the amendment of the indictment and directions to the jury regarding joint enterprise deprived Baccar of a fair trial and rendered his convictions unsafe

Ratio Decidendi

The refusal to allow cross-examination on the complainant's Facebook activity was correct under section 41 YJCEA 1999, as the activity constituted sexual behaviour and was of minimal probative value. The convictions of Ben-Rejab were safe. However, the convictions of Baccar were unsafe because the late amendment of the indictment and the judge's directions on joint enterprise deprived the defence of a fair opportunity to address the new basis of liability to the jury, resulting in potential unfairness.

Court Disposition

Ben-Rejab's appeal against conviction dismissed; Baccar's appeal against conviction allowed; retrial ordered for Baccar on counts 2 and 3; application for leave to appeal sentence by Ben-Rejab refused.

Orders

  • Appeal of Ben-Rejab against conviction dismissed
  • Appeal of Baccar against conviction allowed