R v Anthony Finbar McGrath

R v Anthony Finbar McGrath

The applicant's nine grounds of appeal, including requests for extension of time and admission of fresh evidence, do not give rise to any arguable grounds for appeal. The evidence sought to be introduced is not fresh, could have been adduced at trial, and does not undermine the safety of the convictions. There is no good reason for the delay or for varying the grounds. The trial judge's directions were proper. The application for extension of time is refused and the renewed application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

Parties
Prosecution: Rex; Appellant: Anthony Finbar McGrath
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 August 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Application for extension of time refused; renewed application for leave to appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Fraud, Perverting the Course of Justice, Appeals, Extension of Time, Fresh Evidence, Disclosure, Joinder of Counts, Trial Procedure
Criminal Law Fraud Perverting the Course of Justice Appeals Extension of Time Fresh Evidence Disclosure Joinder of Counts +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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

Anthony Finbar McGrath

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant should be granted an extension of time to appeal nearly 6 years out of time
  2. 2 Whether fresh evidence should be admitted under section 23 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge erred in refusing to admit bad character evidence of a prosecution witness

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's nine grounds of appeal, including requests for extension of time and admission of fresh evidence, do not give rise to any arguable grounds for appeal. The evidence sought to be introduced is not fresh, could have been adduced at trial, and does not undermine the safety of the convictions. There is no good reason for the delay or for varying the grounds. The trial judge's directions were proper. The application for extension of time is refused and the renewed application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time refused; renewed application for leave to appeal dismissed.