McKenzie, R (on the application of) v The Lord Chancellor & Ors

McKenzie, R (on the application of) v The Lord Chancellor & Ors

The listing decision to suspend jury trials was lawful, temporary, and necessary for public health and safety during the Covid-19 pandemic. The pandemic constituted a good and sufficient cause to extend the claimant's custody time limit under s.22(3) POA 1985. The Protocol did not fetter judicial discretion or subvert the statutory scheme. The claimant's constitutional rights were not curtailed, only delayed for safety reasons, and the judge exercised proper discretion in extending the custody time limit.

Parties
Claimant: Anthony McKenzie; Defendant: Crown Court at Leeds; Interested Party: The Lord Chancellor; Interested Party: The Director of Public Prosecutions; Interested Party: The Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment After Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Custody Time Limits, Jury Trials, Judicial Discretion, Covid 19 Protocols, Ultra Vires, Judicial Review
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Administrative Law Custody Time Limits Jury Trials Judicial Discretion Covid 19 Protocols Ultra Vires +1 more

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

Parties

Anthony McKenzie

Claimant

Crown Court at Leeds

Defendant

The Lord Chancellor

Interested Party

The Director of Public Prosecutions

Interested Party

The Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment After Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Lord Chief Justice's listing decision to suspend jury trials was ultra vires and curtailed a constitutional right without primary legislation
  2. 2 Whether the suspension of jury trials could amount to 'good and sufficient cause' to extend the claimant's custody time limit under s.22(3) Prosecution of Offences Act 1985
  3. 3 Whether the Coronavirus Crisis Protocol unlawfully fettered judicial discretion or subverted the statutory scheme for custody time limits

Ratio Decidendi

The listing decision to suspend jury trials was lawful, temporary, and necessary for public health and safety during the Covid-19 pandemic. The pandemic constituted a good and sufficient cause to extend the claimant's custody time limit under s.22(3) POA 1985. The Protocol did not fetter judicial discretion or subvert the statutory scheme. The claimant's constitutional rights were not curtailed, only delayed for safety reasons, and the judge exercised proper discretion in extending the custody time limit.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Permission to apply for judicial review granted
  • Claim dismissed on all grounds