Ukpabi v Crown Prosecution Service

Ukpabi v Crown Prosecution Service

The magistrates' remarks in open court created the impression that they had applied a standard of proof lower than the criminal standard, which required them to be sure of guilt before convicting. This impression of injustice necessitated quashing the conviction.

Parties
Claimant: Kingsley Ukpabi; Defendant: Crown Prosecution Service
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 April 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal by Way of Case Stated / High Court Appeal From Magistrates' Court Conviction
Outcome
Appeal allowed; conviction quashed
Legal Topics
Standard of Proof, Burden of Proof, Assaulting Police Officer, Appeal by Case Stated
Criminal Law Judicial Review Standard of Proof Burden of Proof Assaulting Police Officer Appeal by Case Stated

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kingsley Ukpabi

Claimant

Crown Prosecution Service

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal by Way of Case Stated / High Court Appeal From Magistrates' Court Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the magistrates applied the correct burden and standard of proof in convicting the appellant
  2. 2 Whether the magistrates' remarks in open court created the impression that a lower standard of proof was applied

Ratio Decidendi

The magistrates' remarks in open court created the impression that they had applied a standard of proof lower than the criminal standard, which required them to be sure of guilt before convicting. This impression of injustice necessitated quashing the conviction.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; conviction quashed

Orders

  • Conviction quashed
  • Costs order in favour of appellant for recovery of travelling expenses