BMJ v R

BMJ v R

The applicant was not a victim of trafficking or modern slavery during the relevant period. There was no abuse of process in prosecuting him, and the sentences imposed sufficiently reflected any mitigation. The grounds of appeal against conviction and sentence are unarguable.

Parties
Applicant: BMJ; Respondent: REX
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 June 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Applications for Extension of Time, Leave to Appeal, and Fresh Evidence
Outcome
Applications for extension of time, leave to appeal against conviction and sentence, and to introduce fresh evidence refused.
Legal Topics
Modern Slavery, Trafficking, Drug Offences, Abuse of Process, Sentencing, Duress, Article 4 ECHR

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 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BMJ

Applicant

REX

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Applications for Extension of Time, Leave to Appeal, and Fresh Evidence

  1. 1 Whether the applicant was a victim of trafficking or modern slavery at the material time
  2. 2 Whether the prosecution of the applicant was an abuse of process
  3. 3 Whether the sentences imposed were manifestly excessive given alleged mitigation

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant was not a victim of trafficking or modern slavery during the relevant period. There was no abuse of process in prosecuting him, and the sentences imposed sufficiently reflected any mitigation. The grounds of appeal against conviction and sentence are unarguable.

Court Disposition

Applications for extension of time, leave to appeal against conviction and sentence, and to introduce fresh evidence refused.

Orders

  • Extension of time refused for all sets of offences.
  • Leave to appeal against conviction refused.