Corwn Prosecution Service v S

Corwn Prosecution Service v S

The magistrates erred in law by stopping the case at the no case to answer stage; there was sufficient evidence of joint enterprise and encouragement by S for the case to proceed. The inconsistencies cited were minor and did not justify dismissal. The appeal is allowed and the matter remitted for trial by a differently constituted Bench.

Parties
Claimant: Crown Prosecution Service; Defendant: S
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 December 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (case Stated) / Appeal Against Dismissal at No Case to Answer Stage
Outcome
appeal allowed; matter remitted for trial
Legal Topics
No Case to Answer, Joint Enterprise, Evidential Assessment

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

Parties

Crown Prosecution Service

Claimant

S

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (case Stated) / Appeal Against Dismissal at No Case to Answer Stage

  1. 1 Whether the magistrates erred in law in finding there was no case to answer against the defendant S
  2. 2 Whether the evidence, taken at its highest, was sufficient to require an answer under the Galbraith test

Ratio Decidendi

The magistrates erred in law by stopping the case at the no case to answer stage; there was sufficient evidence of joint enterprise and encouragement by S for the case to proceed. The inconsistencies cited were minor and did not justify dismissal. The appeal is allowed and the matter remitted for trial by a differently constituted Bench.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; matter remitted for trial

Orders

  • Matter remitted to Blackpool Youth Court for trial by a differently constituted Bench
  • Costs payable from central funds in the sum of £2,281.25 including VAT