Lappin, R (on the application of) v HM Customs & Excise

Lappin, R (on the application of) v HM Customs & Excise

The refusal to adjourn did not breach the appellant's Article 6 rights because the failure to obtain expert evidence was due to the appellant's persistent lack of diligence, and the Crown Court's decision to proceed was proportionate and justified in the circumstances.

Parties
Claimant: Brendan Lappin; Defendant: HM Customs and Excise
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 March 2004
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Case Stated / High Court Appeal From Crown Court (case Stated)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Right to Fair Trial, Adjournment, Forfeiture of Proceeds of Crime, Equality of Arms
Civil Procedure Human Rights Right to Fair Trial Adjournment Forfeiture of Proceeds of Crime Equality of Arms

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brendan Lappin

Claimant

HM Customs and Excise

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Case Stated / High Court Appeal From Crown Court (case Stated)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether refusal to adjourn breached the appellant's right to a fair trial under Article 6(1) ECHR

Ratio Decidendi

The refusal to adjourn did not breach the appellant's Article 6 rights because the failure to obtain expert evidence was due to the appellant's persistent lack of diligence, and the Crown Court's decision to proceed was proportionate and justified in the circumstances.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No breach of Article 6; case to proceed; appeal dismissed