Turbill & Anor, R. v

The trial judge's directions failed to adequately distinguish between negligence and wilful neglect, using terms like 'carelessness' and 'reckless' without proper definition, potentially lowering the threshold for conviction. This misdirection undermined the safety of the convictions, requiring them to be quashed.

Source-derived case information.

Parties: Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: Maxine Turbill; Appellant: Gail Julie Broadway
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 12 July 2013
Procedural Posture: Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction; Application for Retrial
Outcome: Convictions quashed; retrial ordered
Legal Topics: Wilful Neglect, Mental Capacity Act, Care Home Liability, Mens Rea, Jury Directions

Criminal Law Health Law Wilful Neglect Mental Capacity Act Care Home Liability Mens Rea Jury Directions

Source-derived case record

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Maxine Turbill

Appellant

Gail Julie Broadway

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction; Application for Retrial

Legal Issues

1 Whether the trial judge's directions to the jury on 'wilful neglect' under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were legally sufficient and correct
2 Whether the convictions should be quashed due to misdirection
3 Whether a retrial is in the public interest

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Convictions quashed; retrial ordered

Orders

Convictions quashed for Maxine Turbill and Gail Julie Broadway
Fresh indictment to be served within four weeks

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.