W, C and C, R. v

W, C and C, R. v

The judge erred in law by focusing exclusively on the respondents' intentions and immediate use of the material, rather than considering the status of the material as waste at the time of excavation and deposit, and by failing to leave to the jury the factual determination of whether the material was 'waste' and 'controlled waste' under the Act. There was sufficient evidence for the case to go to the jury, and the defence submission of no case should not have been accepted.

Parties
Appellant: Regina; Respondent: W; Respondent: C
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 May 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against a Ruling of No Case to Answer at Trial
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Controlled Waste, Waste Management Licensing, Interpretation of 'waste' Under Environmental Protection Act, Burden of Proof in Environmental Offences
Environmental Law Criminal Law Controlled Waste Waste Management Licensing Interpretation of 'waste' Under Environmental Protection Act Burden of Proof in Environmental Offences

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 4 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Appellant

W

Respondent

C

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against a Ruling of No Case to Answer at Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the deposited material constituted 'waste' or 'controlled waste' under the Environmental Protection Act 1990
  2. 2 Whether the prosecution had established a case to answer on the evidence
  3. 3 Whether the judge erred in law in acceding to the defence submission of no case

Ratio Decidendi

The judge erred in law by focusing exclusively on the respondents' intentions and immediate use of the material, rather than considering the status of the material as waste at the time of excavation and deposit, and by failing to leave to the jury the factual determination of whether the material was 'waste' and 'controlled waste' under the Act. There was sufficient evidence for the case to go to the jury, and the defence submission of no case should not have been accepted.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • A fresh trial may take place in the Crown Court for the offences charged in the indictment.