Andrew Osarinmwian, R (on the application of) v Manchester Crown Court

Andrew Osarinmwian, R (on the application of) v Manchester Crown Court

The Judge was entitled, on the evidence and chronology before him, to conclude that the prosecution had not failed to act with all due diligence and expedition in the circumstances, including the complexities and genuine difficulties encountered. The errors made were in good faith and did not amount to a lack of due diligence. The decision to extend the custody time limit was not unreasonable in public law terms.

Parties
Claimant: Andrew Osarinmwian; Defendant: Manchester Crown Court; Interested Party: Manchester Crown Prosecution Service
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Substantive Judgment After Rolled Up Hearing
Outcome
Claim for judicial review dismissed; permission for judicial review granted; application for interim relief falls away.
Legal Topics
Custody Time Limits, Disclosure, Due Diligence, Encro Chat Evidence
Criminal Law Judicial Review Criminal Procedure Custody Time Limits Disclosure Due Diligence Encro Chat Evidence

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andrew Osarinmwian

Claimant

Manchester Crown Court

Defendant

Manchester Crown Prosecution Service

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Substantive Judgment After Rolled Up Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution acted with all due diligence and expedition in complying with a disclosure order, as required for extension of custody time limits under statute
  2. 2 Whether the Judge's decision to extend the custody time limit was reasonable in public law terms

Ratio Decidendi

The Judge was entitled, on the evidence and chronology before him, to conclude that the prosecution had not failed to act with all due diligence and expedition in the circumstances, including the complexities and genuine difficulties encountered. The errors made were in good faith and did not amount to a lack of due diligence. The decision to extend the custody time limit was not unreasonable in public law terms.

Court Disposition

Claim for judicial review dismissed; permission for judicial review granted; application for interim relief falls away.

Orders

  • Permission for judicial review granted
  • Substantive claim for judicial review dismissed