X v Y

X v Y

The prosecutor failed to evaluate and take into account two material risk factors in the risk assessment. Awareness alone is insufficient; proper evaluation and consideration are required. The decision to continue prosecution was therefore unlawful and must be quashed.

Parties
Claimant: X; Defendant: Y
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 May 2005
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Substantive Application After Renewed Permission
Outcome
Decision to continue prosecution quashed; matter remitted for reconsideration.
Legal Topics
Disclosure of Informant Status, Prosecutorial Discretion, Articles 2 and 3 ECHR, Risk Assessment, Witness Protection
Criminal Law Human Rights Law Judicial Review Disclosure of Informant Status Prosecutorial Discretion Articles 2 and 3 ECHR Risk Assessment Witness Protection

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

X

Claimant

Y

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Substantive Application After Renewed Permission

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prosecutor's decision to continue prosecution after disclosure of informant status was lawful under Articles 2 and 3 ECHR
  2. 2 Whether the risk assessment considered all relevant factors

Ratio Decidendi

The prosecutor failed to evaluate and take into account two material risk factors in the risk assessment. Awareness alone is insufficient; proper evaluation and consideration are required. The decision to continue prosecution was therefore unlawful and must be quashed.

Court Disposition

Decision to continue prosecution quashed; matter remitted for reconsideration.

Orders

  • The decision to continue the criminal proceedings against X is quashed.
  • The decision must be retaken with due regard to the material factors identified by the court.