C, R. v

C, R. v

The judge's summing-up was balanced, fair, and adequately reviewed the defence case through expert evidence and cross-examination; no additional direction on circumstantial evidence was required, and the conviction is safe.

Parties
Appellant: C; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 November 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Grievous Bodily Harm, Circumstantial Evidence, Jury Directions, Adverse Inference
Criminal Law Grievous Bodily Harm Circumstantial Evidence Jury Directions Adverse Inference

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C

Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge's failure to warn the jury of circumstantial evidence and failure to highlight the defence case rendered the conviction unsafe
  2. 2 Whether the summing-up was adequate and fair
  3. 3 Whether the adverse inference direction prejudiced the appellant

Ratio Decidendi

The judge's summing-up was balanced, fair, and adequately reviewed the defence case through expert evidence and cross-examination; no additional direction on circumstantial evidence was required, and the conviction is safe.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed