TL, R. v [2018] EWCA Crim 1821 (31 July 2018)

TL, R. v [2018] EWCA Crim 1821 (31 July 2018)

The principles of entrapment and abuse of process as articulated in R v Looseley apply primarily to state actors. The conduct of a private citizen, even if proactive in gathering evidence, does not justify a stay of proceedings unless it is so egregious as to compromise the integrity of the court. In this case, Mr...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2018] EWCA Crim 1821
Parties
Appellant: Regina; Respondent: TL
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 July 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Stay of Proceedings (abuse of Process)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; stay of proceedings set aside; new trial ordered.
Legal Topics
Entrapment, Abuse of Process, Non State Actor Evidence, Stay of Proceedings
Criminal Law Procedure Entrapment Abuse of Process Non State Actor Evidence Stay of Proceedings

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 3 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Appellant

TL

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Stay of Proceedings (abuse of Process)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the principles of entrapment and abuse of process apply to non-state actors as they do to state agents
  2. 2 Whether the conduct of a private citizen (vigilante) in gathering evidence can justify a stay of prosecution as an abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The principles of entrapment and abuse of process as articulated in R v Looseley apply primarily to state actors. The conduct of a private citizen, even if proactive in gathering evidence, does not justify a stay of proceedings unless it is so egregious as to compromise the integrity of the court. In this case, Mr U's conduct did not reach that threshold, and the judge erred in applying the same test to non-state actors as to state agents.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; stay of proceedings set aside; new trial ordered.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal granted
  • Appeal allowed