Johnson, R (On the Application Of) v Crown Prosecution Service [2019] EWHC 317 (Admin) (19 February 2019)

Johnson, R (On the Application Of) v Crown Prosecution Service [2019] EWHC 317 (Admin) (19 February 2019)

The CPS's decision not to prosecute was rational and lawful, based on a reasonable assessment of the evidence and in compliance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors. The likelihood of a special verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity and an absolute discharge justified the decision at the public interest stage. The duty of candour was met and further disclosure was not necessary.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 317 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: David Johnson; Defendant: Crown Prosecution Service; Interested Party: George Steele
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Permission Application
Outcome
Permission to claim judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Prosecutorial Discretion, Automatism Defence, Insanity Defence, Disclosure in Judicial Review, Victims' Rights to Review, Public Interest Test
Criminal Law Administrative Law Judicial Review Prosecutorial Discretion Automatism Defence Insanity Defence Disclosure in Judicial Review Victims' Rights to Review +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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Johnson

Claimant

Crown Prosecution Service

Defendant

George Steele

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Permission Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the CPS decision not to prosecute for causing death by dangerous driving was lawful
  2. 2 Whether the CPS complied with its own policy and the Code for Crown Prosecutors
  3. 3 Whether the CPS misinterpreted or gave undue weight to medical evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The CPS's decision not to prosecute was rational and lawful, based on a reasonable assessment of the evidence and in compliance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors. The likelihood of a special verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity and an absolute discharge justified the decision at the public interest stage. The duty of candour was met and further disclosure was not necessary.

Court Disposition

Permission to claim judicial review refused

Orders

  • Application for permission to claim judicial review refused
  • Application for disclosure refused