Hughes, R (on the application of) v Woolwich Crown Court & Anor [2006] EWHC 2191 (Admin) (16 August 2006)

Hughes, R (on the application of) v Woolwich Crown Court & Anor [2006] EWHC 2191 (Admin) (16 August 2006)

The prosecution failed to act with all due expedition in obtaining material evidence, having been put on notice well before the defence statement, and the judge below misdirected himself by not considering earlier requests and prosecutorial duty; therefore, the extension of custody time limits was wrongly granted.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2006] EWHC 2191 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Anthony Donovan Hughes; Defendant: Woolwich Crown Court; Interested Party: Crown Prosecution Service
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 August 2006
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Permission and Substantive Hearing
Outcome
Decision quashed; permission for judicial review granted; substantive claim succeeds; matter remitted to Crown Court.
Legal Topics
Custody Time Limits, Disclosure Obligations, Bail
Criminal Law Judicial Review Custody Time Limits Disclosure Obligations Bail

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anthony Donovan Hughes

Claimant

Woolwich Crown Court

Defendant

Crown Prosecution Service

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Permission and Substantive Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution acted with all due expedition in obtaining material evidence relevant to the defence
  2. 2 Whether there was good and sufficient cause to extend custody time limits under section 22(3) of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985

Ratio Decidendi

The prosecution failed to act with all due expedition in obtaining material evidence, having been put on notice well before the defence statement, and the judge below misdirected himself by not considering earlier requests and prosecutorial duty; therefore, the extension of custody time limits was wrongly granted.

Court Disposition

Decision quashed; permission for judicial review granted; substantive claim succeeds; matter remitted to Crown Court.

Orders

  • Decision of His Honour Judge Stone quashed
  • Matter remitted to Woolwich Crown Court for further determination