C, R v [2003] EWCA Crim 1246 (10 April 2003)

C, R v [2003] EWCA Crim 1246 (10 April 2003)

The conviction was unsafe because critical medical evidence, which showed the alleged rape could not have occurred during the period when the appellant had access to the complainant, was not disclosed at trial. This non-disclosure constituted a serious breach of duty and destroyed the prosecution case.

Citation
[2003] EWCA Crim 1246
Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Martin C
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 April 2003
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal After Referral by Criminal Cases Review Commission
Outcome
appeal allowed; conviction quashed
Legal Topics
Rape, Unsafe Conviction, Disclosure Obligations, Fresh Evidence, Miscarriage of Justice
Criminal Law Rape Unsafe Conviction Disclosure Obligations Fresh Evidence Miscarriage of Justice

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

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Martin C

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal After Referral by Criminal Cases Review Commission

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conviction for rape was unsafe due to non-disclosure of material evidence and fresh medical evidence discovered post-trial

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction was unsafe because critical medical evidence, which showed the alleged rape could not have occurred during the period when the appellant had access to the complainant, was not disclosed at trial. This non-disclosure constituted a serious breach of duty and destroyed the prosecution case.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; conviction quashed

Orders

  • Conviction quashed
  • Director of Public Prosecutions invited to review the case and consider further action regarding disclosure failings and professional conduct