Jex & Ors, R. v [2021] EWCA Crim 1708 (19 November 2021)

Jex & Ors, R. v [2021] EWCA Crim 1708 (19 November 2021)

Errors in recording the statutory basis for committal for sentence do not invalidate the committal if the underlying power exists, due to the continuity and transitional provisions of the Sentencing Act 2020. Section 133(2) Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 permits an aggregate of up to 12 months' imprisonment for consecutive sentences where two or more either-way offences are sentenced, including any other offences sentenced at the same time. Where a committal is a nullity, the Crown Court lacks jurisdiction and any sentence imposed is quashed.

Citation
[2021] EWCA Crim 1708
Parties
Prosecution: THE CROWN; Applicant: Gareth Owen Jex; Applicant: Shaun Christopher Johnson; Applicant: Adam Daniel Archer
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 November 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeals by Jex and Archer dismissed; Johnson's sentence and committal quashed as a nullity; directions given for further proceedings in Magistrates' and Crown Court as appropriate.
Legal Topics
Committal for Sentence, Suspended Sentence Orders, Sentencing Powers of Magistrates' Court, Transitional Provisions Under Sentencing Act 2020, Errors in Court Records, Consecutive Sentences, Jurisdictional Nullity
Criminal Law Sentencing Committal for Sentence Suspended Sentence Orders Sentencing Powers of Magistrates' Court Transitional Provisions Under Sentencing Act 2020 Errors in Court Records Consecutive Sentences +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 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

THE CROWN

Prosecution

Gareth Owen Jex

Applicant

Shaun Christopher Johnson

Applicant

Adam Daniel Archer

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether errors in recording statutory provisions for committal for sentence invalidate the committal and subsequent Crown Court jurisdiction
  2. 2 Interpretation of section 133(2) Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 regarding consecutive sentences for either-way and summary offences
  3. 3 Effect of administrative errors and inaccurate PNC records on sentencing and committal validity

Ratio Decidendi

Errors in recording the statutory basis for committal for sentence do not invalidate the committal if the underlying power exists, due to the continuity and transitional provisions of the Sentencing Act 2020. Section 133(2) Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 permits an aggregate of up to 12 months' imprisonment for consecutive sentences where two or more either-way offences are sentenced, including any other offences sentenced at the same time. Where a committal is a nullity, the Crown Court lacks jurisdiction and any sentence imposed is quashed.

Court Disposition

Appeals by Jex and Archer dismissed; Johnson's sentence and committal quashed as a nullity; directions given for further proceedings in Magistrates' and Crown Court as appropriate.

Orders

  • Jex: Applications for leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed on all grounds; sentence stands.
  • Johnson: Sentence and committal quashed; leave granted for judicial review; directions for rehearing in Magistrates' and Crown Court.