Uthayakumar, R v [2014] EWCA Crim 123 (15 January 2014)

Uthayakumar, R v [2014] EWCA Crim 123 (15 January 2014)

Convictions quashed because both appellants pleaded guilty on the basis of incorrect legal advice regarding the necessity of fault for the offence; the Supreme Court has since clarified that fault is required, and the available defences are strong. It would be a substantial injustice to allow the convictions to stand.

Citation
[2014] EWCA Crim 123
Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: Ariyamalar Uthayakumar; Appellant: Curtis Clayton
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 January 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Application for Retrial
Outcome
convictions quashed, no retrial ordered
Legal Topics
Causing Death by Driving While Uninsured, Guilty Plea and Miscarriage of Justice, Fault Requirement in Criminal Liability, Public Interest in Retrial
Criminal Law Road Traffic Law Causing Death by Driving While Uninsured Guilty Plea and Miscarriage of Justice Fault Requirement in Criminal Liability Public Interest in Retrial

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

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Ariyamalar Uthayakumar

Appellant

Curtis Clayton

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Application for Retrial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether convictions for causing death by driving while uninsured under section 3ZB of the Road Traffic Act 1988 should be quashed following clarification of the law by the Supreme Court in Hughes.
  2. 2 Whether it is in the interests of justice to order a retrial after quashing the convictions.

Ratio Decidendi

Convictions quashed because both appellants pleaded guilty on the basis of incorrect legal advice regarding the necessity of fault for the offence; the Supreme Court has since clarified that fault is required, and the available defences are strong. It would be a substantial injustice to allow the convictions to stand.

Court Disposition

convictions quashed, no retrial ordered

Orders

  • Extensions of time and leave to appeal granted.
  • Convictions of both appellants quashed.