Crown Prosecution Service, R (on the application of) v Wolverhampton Magistrates' Court

Crown Prosecution Service, R (on the application of) v Wolverhampton Magistrates' Court

The District Judge erred by excluding the evidence as a sanction for police training failures rather than considering whether its admission would adversely affect the fairness of the proceedings. The unlawfulness of the arrest did not occasion unfairness to the defendant, and the evidence should not have been...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: Crown Prosecution Service; Defendant: Wolverhampton Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 November 2009
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment on Application for Judicial Review
Outcome
application for judicial review granted; acquittal quashed
Legal Topics
Unlawful Arrest, Admissibility of Evidence, Road Traffic Offences, Judicial Discretion, Police Powers
Criminal Law Administrative Law Unlawful Arrest Admissibility of Evidence Road Traffic Offences Judicial Discretion Police Powers

Source-derived case record

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

Parties

Crown Prosecution Service

Claimant

Wolverhampton Magistrates' Court

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment on Application for Judicial Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arrest of the defendant was unlawful due to failure to conduct a preliminary roadside test as required by the Road Traffic Act 1988
  2. 2 Whether evidence obtained following an unlawful arrest should be excluded under section 78 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE)

Ratio Decidendi

The District Judge erred by excluding the evidence as a sanction for police training failures rather than considering whether its admission would adversely affect the fairness of the proceedings. The unlawfulness of the arrest did not occasion unfairness to the defendant, and the evidence should not have been excluded under section 78 of PACE.

Court Disposition

application for judicial review granted; acquittal quashed

Orders

  • The defendant's acquittal is quashed.
  • The case is remitted to the Magistrates' Court to proceed with the trial before the same District Judge.