D, R (on the application of) v Stratford Youth Court

D, R (on the application of) v Stratford Youth Court

There was sufficient admissible evidence at the close of the Crown's case to justify the Justices' refusal of the submission of no case to answer; the Justices' reasoning on identification and participation was open to them on the evidence.

Parties
Claimant: D; Defendant: Stratford Youth Court; Interested Party: Crown Prosecution Service
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 October 2005
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Application for Judicial Review of Refusal to State a Case
Outcome
Application for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Common Assault, No Case to Answer Submission, Hearsay Evidence, Identification Evidence, Youth Justice
Criminal Law Judicial Review Common Assault No Case to Answer Submission Hearsay Evidence Identification Evidence Youth Justice

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

D

Claimant

Stratford Youth Court

Defendant

Crown Prosecution Service

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Application for Judicial Review of Refusal to State a Case

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Justices erred in refusing a submission of no case to answer
  2. 2 Whether inadmissible hearsay was relied upon
  3. 3 Whether the Justices' reasoning on identification was sound

Ratio Decidendi

There was sufficient admissible evidence at the close of the Crown's case to justify the Justices' refusal of the submission of no case to answer; the Justices' reasoning on identification and participation was open to them on the evidence.

Court Disposition

Application for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Order under section 39 Children and Young Persons Act 1933 prohibiting publication of anything likely to lead to identification of the claimant