R v BVY

R v BVY

The trial judge applied the correct legal test for admissibility of bad character evidence under s.100(1)(b) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 and reasonably concluded that the evidence did not have substantial probative value in relation to C1’s credibility. The judge’s assessment was not Wednesbury unreasonable, and there was no error of legal principle. The convictions are therefore safe.

Parties
Appellant: BVY; Respondent: Rex
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 July 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Sexual Offences, Bad Character Evidence, Credibility of Witnesses, Admissibility of Evidence
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Bad Character Evidence Credibility of Witnesses Admissibility of Evidence

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

Parties

BVY

Appellant

Rex

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in refusing to admit bad character evidence of C1 under s.100(1)(b) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 on the issue of her credibility
  2. 2 Whether the convictions are unsafe due to exclusion of this evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge applied the correct legal test for admissibility of bad character evidence under s.100(1)(b) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 and reasonably concluded that the evidence did not have substantial probative value in relation to C1’s credibility. The judge’s assessment was not Wednesbury unreasonable, and there was no error of legal principle. The convictions are therefore safe.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal against conviction is dismissed.