Lal, R. v

Lal, R. v

The conviction was unsafe because the trial judge withdrew the defence of duress from the jury without giving counsel an opportunity to address the issue, and the facts were not so clear as to justify such withdrawal.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Rakesh Lal
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
conviction quashed
Legal Topics
Duress, Withdrawal of Defence, Jury Directions, Unsafe Conviction, Appeal Procedure
Criminal Law Duress Withdrawal of Defence Jury Directions Unsafe Conviction Appeal Procedure

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

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Rakesh Lal

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in withdrawing the defence of duress from the jury without giving counsel an opportunity to address the issue
  2. 2 Whether the conviction is unsafe in light of the withdrawal of the duress defence

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction was unsafe because the trial judge withdrew the defence of duress from the jury without giving counsel an opportunity to address the issue, and the facts were not so clear as to justify such withdrawal.

Court Disposition

conviction quashed

Orders

  • extension of time granted
  • leave to appeal granted