Hibbert, R. v [2025] EWCA Crim 1730 (16 December 2025)

Hibbert, R. v [2025] EWCA Crim 1730 (16 December 2025)

There was sufficient evidence, including incriminating communications and conduct, from which a reasonable jury could infer that the appellant participated in the planning of the murder with the necessary mens rea, and thus the judge was correct to reject the submission of no case to answer.

Citation
[2025] EWCA Crim 1730
Parties
Prosecution: Rex; Appellant: Luke Hibbert
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 December 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction After Trial and Sentence
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Murder, Secondary Liability, No Case to Answer, Joint Enterprise, Appeal Against Conviction
Criminal Law Murder Secondary Liability No Case to Answer Joint Enterprise Appeal Against Conviction

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

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

Luke Hibbert

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction After Trial and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in rejecting the submission of no case to answer on the charge of murder against the appellant
  2. 2 Whether there was sufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to infer the appellant's participation in the planning of the murder

Ratio Decidendi

There was sufficient evidence, including incriminating communications and conduct, from which a reasonable jury could infer that the appellant participated in the planning of the murder with the necessary mens rea, and thus the judge was correct to reject the submission of no case to answer.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Conviction for murder upheld
  • No error in the trial judge's ruling on no case to answer