Crown Prosecution Service v P

Crown Prosecution Service v P

Disclosure of draft judgments must be strictly limited to those directly involved in the case and their immediate supervisors for the purpose of taking instructions; wider dissemination within organisations or to external bodies is not permitted under the current Practice Direction and constitutes a breach of confidentiality.

Parties
Claimant: Crown Prosecution Service; Defendant: P
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 April 2007
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment After Appeal From Youth Court Decision
Outcome
Apology for breach of confidentiality accepted; guidance issued on proper disclosure of draft judgments; no substantive orders on the appeal itself.
Legal Topics
Confidentiality of Draft Judgments, Practice Direction E to CPR Part 40, Disclosure Within Legal Organisations, Doli Incapax, Procedural Propriety
Criminal Law Civil Procedure Confidentiality of Draft Judgments Practice Direction E to CPR Part 40 Disclosure Within Legal Organisations Doli Incapax Procedural Propriety

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Crown Prosecution Service

Claimant

P

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment After Appeal From Youth Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the dissemination of a draft judgment within the CPS and to external bodies breached the confidentiality obligations under Practice Direction E to CPR Part 40
  2. 2 Proper scope of disclosure of draft judgments within legal organisations
  3. 3 Appropriate procedure for further submissions on issues not fully argued at hearing

Ratio Decidendi

Disclosure of draft judgments must be strictly limited to those directly involved in the case and their immediate supervisors for the purpose of taking instructions; wider dissemination within organisations or to external bodies is not permitted under the current Practice Direction and constitutes a breach of confidentiality.

Court Disposition

Apology for breach of confidentiality accepted; guidance issued on proper disclosure of draft judgments; no substantive orders on the appeal itself.

Orders

  • All copies of the draft judgment, both hard and electronic, to be destroyed.
  • The Director of Public Prosecutions to confer with the President of the Queen's Bench Division regarding the proposed protocol on confidentiality.