Malcolm v R.

Malcolm v R.

The combined effect of the Recorder's persistent criticism of the defence statement and his directions to the prosecution to call additional witnesses created the perception of bias and judicial partiality, rendering the trial unfair and the conviction unsafe.

Parties
Appellant: Wayne Patrick Malcolm; Respondent: The Crown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 September 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal allowed, conviction quashed
Legal Topics
Judicial Impartiality, Defence Statements, Fair Trial, Judicial Intervention, Case Management, Adverse Inference
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Judicial Impartiality Defence Statements Fair Trial Judicial Intervention Case Management Adverse Inference

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wayne Patrick Malcolm

Appellant

The Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Recorder's interventions and directions rendered the trial unfair
  2. 2 Whether the inadequacy of the defence statement justified judicial intervention
  3. 3 Whether the judge's conduct created an appearance of bias or partiality

Ratio Decidendi

The combined effect of the Recorder's persistent criticism of the defence statement and his directions to the prosecution to call additional witnesses created the perception of bias and judicial partiality, rendering the trial unfair and the conviction unsafe.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed, conviction quashed

Orders

  • Conviction quashed
  • Written submissions invited on retrial