R v Katie Ng & Anor

R v Katie Ng & Anor

The judge erred in law and fact by staying the proceedings as an abuse of process. The delays were not solely attributable to prosecutorial absence, and there was no prosecutorial misconduct sufficient to justify a stay. The correct legal principles were not applied, and the exceptional remedy of a stay was not warranted. The proper course was case management and, if necessary, adjournment, not a terminating ruling.

Parties
Appellant: The King; Respondent: Katie Ng; Respondent: Antony O’Reilly
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 May 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Terminating Ruling (stay for Abuse of Process)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; terminating ruling (stay) reversed; proceedings to resume in Crown Court.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Adjournment of Trial, Stay of Proceedings, Prosecutorial Misconduct, Right to Fair Trial, Case Management, Listing Practices
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Abuse of Process Adjournment of Trial Stay of Proceedings Prosecutorial Misconduct Right to Fair Trial Case Management +1 more

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 6 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The King

Appellant

Katie Ng

Respondent

Antony O’Reilly

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Terminating Ruling (stay for Abuse of Process)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the failure of the CPS to secure prosecuting counsel and resulting delay amounted to an abuse of process justifying a stay of proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in law and fact in staying the indictment as an abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The judge erred in law and fact by staying the proceedings as an abuse of process. The delays were not solely attributable to prosecutorial absence, and there was no prosecutorial misconduct sufficient to justify a stay. The correct legal principles were not applied, and the exceptional remedy of a stay was not warranted. The proper course was case management and, if necessary, adjournment, not a terminating ruling.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; terminating ruling (stay) reversed; proceedings to resume in Crown Court.

Orders

  • Terminating ruling (stay) set aside
  • Case to be listed as a fixed trial on the first available date in the Crown Court