R & Anor, R v

R & Anor, R v

The court held that 'undue delay' in section 40(7) POCA is a freestanding test and not limited to abuse of process. On the facts, the delay in the proceedings, caused primarily by the prosecution's flawed approach to disclosure, was 'undue' and thus the court had no jurisdiction to grant the restraint orders. The appeal was dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: Regina (The Crown); Respondent: W; Respondent: R
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 December 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Refusal to Grant Restraint Orders
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Restraint Orders, Undue Delay, Statutory Interpretation, Disclosure Obligations
Criminal Law Proceeds of Crime Restraint Orders Undue Delay Statutory Interpretation Disclosure Obligations

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina (The Crown)

Appellant

W

Respondent

R

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Refusal to Grant Restraint Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court had jurisdiction to grant restraint orders under section 41 of POCA given alleged undue delay in proceedings as per section 40(7)
  2. 2 Whether 'undue delay' in section 40(7) POCA requires delay amounting to abuse of process or a freestanding test
  3. 3 Whether the delay in this case was 'undue' so as to bar the making of restraint orders

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that 'undue delay' in section 40(7) POCA is a freestanding test and not limited to abuse of process. On the facts, the delay in the proceedings, caused primarily by the prosecution's flawed approach to disclosure, was 'undue' and thus the court had no jurisdiction to grant the restraint orders. The appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed and the judge's decision refusing restraint orders is confirmed.