Dawes & Ors v R.

Dawes & Ors v R.

In each appeal, the court held that the evidence did not meet the statutory threshold for the loss of control defence to be left to the jury: in Dawes, there was no evidence of loss of self-control; in Hatter, the circumstances did not amount to extremely grave character or a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged; in Bowyer, the facts did not support any justifiable sense of being seriously wronged and there was no evidence of loss of control. The trial judges' decisions were correct and the appeals were dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: Carlos Dawes; Appellant: Mark John Hatter; Appellant: Barry Francis Bowyer; Respondent: R
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 March 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Murder, Loss of Control Defence, Manslaughter, Self Defence, Qualifying Trigger, Coroners and Justice Act 2009
Criminal Law Murder Loss of Control Defence Manslaughter Self Defence Qualifying Trigger Coroners and Justice Act 2009

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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Carlos Dawes

Appellant

Mark John Hatter

Appellant

Barry Francis Bowyer

Appellant

R

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judges erred in not leaving the loss of control defence to the jury in each case
  2. 2 Interpretation and application of ss.54 and 55 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 regarding loss of control
  3. 3 Whether the evidence in each case was sufficient to raise the loss of control defence

Ratio Decidendi

In each appeal, the court held that the evidence did not meet the statutory threshold for the loss of control defence to be left to the jury: in Dawes, there was no evidence of loss of self-control; in Hatter, the circumstances did not amount to extremely grave character or a justifiable sense of being seriously wronged; in Bowyer, the facts did not support any justifiable sense of being seriously wronged and there was no evidence of loss of control. The trial judges' decisions were correct and the appeals were dismissed.

Court Disposition

appeals dismissed