O v R. [2019] EWCA Crim 1389 (31 July 2019)

O v R. [2019] EWCA Crim 1389 (31 July 2019)

The applicant was a victim of trafficking; the offences were integral to and consequent upon her exploitation, extinguishing culpability. The prosecutor failed to consider public interest in prosecution per CPS guidance. Proper consideration would have led to a stay of prosecution. The convictions are unsafe and must be quashed. Extension of time is justified to prevent significant injustice.

Citation
[2019] EWCA Crim 1389
Parties
Applicant/appellant: O; Respondent: The Queen
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; convictions quashed.
Legal Topics
Victims of Trafficking, Abuse of Process, Extension of Time, Fresh Evidence, Public Interest in Prosecution, Anonymity Orders
Criminal Law Human Rights Immigration Law Victims of Trafficking Abuse of Process Extension of Time Fresh Evidence Public Interest in Prosecution +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 4 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

O

Applicant/appellant

The Queen

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicant was a victim of trafficking at the time of the offences
  2. 2 Whether offences were committed as a result of compulsion arising from trafficking
  3. 3 Whether there was sufficient nexus between trafficking and offending to extinguish culpability

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant was a victim of trafficking; the offences were integral to and consequent upon her exploitation, extinguishing culpability. The prosecutor failed to consider public interest in prosecution per CPS guidance. Proper consideration would have led to a stay of prosecution. The convictions are unsafe and must be quashed. Extension of time is justified to prevent significant injustice.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; convictions quashed.

Orders

  • Extension of time granted
  • Permission to rely on fresh evidence granted