I, R & T, R. v

I, R & T, R. v

Once the judge accepted that the CIE test is a well-recognised and reliable method for detecting animal protein in blood, its results were admissible as expert evidence. Doubts about reliability in a novel context affect the weight of the evidence, not its admissibility.

Parties
Prosecution: The Queen; Defendant: I, R & T
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 June 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Prosecution Appeal Against Trial Court's Exclusion of Expert Evidence Prior to Trial
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Expert Evidence, Scientific Evidence, Criminal Procedure
Criminal Law Evidence Admissibility of Expert Evidence Scientific Evidence Criminal Procedure

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen

Prosecution

I, R & T

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Prosecution Appeal Against Trial Court's Exclusion of Expert Evidence Prior to Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the CIE test results are admissible as expert evidence in a criminal trial
  2. 2 Whether doubts about the reliability of the CIE test in a novel context affect admissibility or weight

Ratio Decidendi

Once the judge accepted that the CIE test is a well-recognised and reliable method for detecting animal protein in blood, its results were admissible as expert evidence. Doubts about reliability in a novel context affect the weight of the evidence, not its admissibility.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Proceedings on the indictment to be resumed in the Crown Court
  • Trial judge to rule on admissibility and weight of evidence based on evidence at trial