R. v FB (Rev 1)

R. v FB (Rev 1)

A Crown Court judge has no power to quash an indictment or terminate proceedings merely because he considers the prosecution unmeritorious, trivial, or not in the public interest; such power exists only in cases of abuse of process, defective indictment, or lack of jurisdiction. The Criminal Procedure Rules 2010 do not alter this position or confer a wider power to terminate proceedings for reasons of efficiency or resource allocation.

Parties
Appellant: The Queen; Respondent: FB; Respondent: AB; Respondent: JC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 July 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Crown Court Terminating Ruling
Outcome
Appeal allowed; terminating rulings quashed; cases remitted for retrial before a different judge.
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Case Management, Judicial Powers, Quashing Indictments
Criminal Law Judicial Review Procedure Abuse of Process Case Management Judicial Powers Quashing Indictments

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 3 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen

Appellant

FB

Respondent

AB

Respondent

JC

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Crown Court Terminating Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a Crown Court judge has power to quash an indictment on grounds of perceived lack of public interest or triviality absent abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether the Criminal Procedure Rules 2010 confer a wider power to terminate proceedings than previously recognised at common law

Ratio Decidendi

A Crown Court judge has no power to quash an indictment or terminate proceedings merely because he considers the prosecution unmeritorious, trivial, or not in the public interest; such power exists only in cases of abuse of process, defective indictment, or lack of jurisdiction. The Criminal Procedure Rules 2010 do not alter this position or confer a wider power to terminate proceedings for reasons of efficiency or resource allocation.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; terminating rulings quashed; cases remitted for retrial before a different judge.

Orders

  • Decisions of Judge Shorrock quashing indictments set aside.
  • Cases sent back to Crown Court at Woolwich for fresh trial before a different judge.