S & Anor, R v

S & Anor, R v

The judge was not in a position to rule out the defence of necessity for all time based solely on the material before him; the defence should be allowed to advance necessity if further material is adduced, subject to case management controls.

Parties
Prosecution: R; Appellant: S; Appellant: L
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 January 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Preparatory Hearing
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Defence of Necessity, Case Management, Private Security Industry Act 2001
Criminal Law Defence of Necessity Case Management Private Security Industry Act 2001

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R

Prosecution

S

Appellant

L

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Preparatory Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defence of necessity can be left to the jury in the circumstances alleged
  2. 2 Whether the judge was correct to rule out the defence of necessity based on the evidential material before him

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was not in a position to rule out the defence of necessity for all time based solely on the material before him; the defence should be allowed to advance necessity if further material is adduced, subject to case management controls.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Defendants permitted to advance the defence of necessity at trial, subject to case management controls
  • No costs awarded from central funds