AUS, R. v (Rev1) [2024] EWCA Crim 322 (13 March 2024)
The applicant was not advised of a statutory defence which would quite probably have succeeded, resulting in a clear injustice. The extension of time is granted, the appeal is allowed, and the conviction is quashed.
- Citation
- [2024] EWCA Crim 322
- Parties
- Applicant: AUS; Respondent: Rex
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 13 March 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Against Conviction
- Outcome
- Conviction quashed; appeal allowed; extension of time granted; leave to appeal granted; fresh evidence admitted.
- Legal Topics
- Possession of False Identity Document, Statutory Defence Under Section 31 Immigration and Asylum Act 1999, Refugee Convention, Guilty Plea Validity, Extension of Time for Appeal
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
AUS
Applicant
Rex
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Against Conviction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the applicant was properly advised of the statutory defence under section 31 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999
- 2 Whether the guilty plea was a nullity due to lack of advice
- 3 Whether an extension of time for appeal should be granted after more than 12 years
Ratio Decidendi
The applicant was not advised of a statutory defence which would quite probably have succeeded, resulting in a clear injustice. The extension of time is granted, the appeal is allowed, and the conviction is quashed.
Court Disposition
Conviction quashed; appeal allowed; extension of time granted; leave to appeal granted; fresh evidence admitted.
Orders
- Applicant's conviction quashed
- Extension of time to appeal granted
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment