MO, & Ors, R. v

MO, & Ors, R. v

The judge's terminating ruling was not justified by the factual findings or legal principles; late disclosure could have been accommodated and did not prevent a fair trial. There was no evidence of missing or lost material, and criticisms of the prosecution were unjustified. The appeal was allowed and a fresh trial ordered.

Parties
Appellant: The Queen; Respondent: MO; Respondent: CH; Respondent: JM; Respondent: DB; Respondent: HS
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave and Substantive Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Disclosure, Abuse of Process, Terminating Rulings, Fair Trial, Case Management
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Disclosure Abuse of Process Terminating Rulings Fair Trial Case Management

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen

Appellant

MO

Respondent

CH

Respondent

JM

Respondent

DB

Respondent

HS

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave and Substantive Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution failures of disclosure justified a terminating ruling staying the trial
  2. 2 Whether late disclosure prevented a fair trial
  3. 3 Whether the judge's findings of missing or lost material were justified

Ratio Decidendi

The judge's terminating ruling was not justified by the factual findings or legal principles; late disclosure could have been accommodated and did not prevent a fair trial. There was no evidence of missing or lost material, and criticisms of the prosecution were unjustified. The appeal was allowed and a fresh trial ordered.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • leave to appeal granted
  • terminating ruling set aside