Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Court of Appeal allowed an Attorney General’s reference, finding a sentence for child sexual offences unduly lenient and increasing the custodial term on count 5.
On the specific facts, the filming was intimately and integrally connected to the sexual touching, both temporally and in purpose. The failure to disclose the filming deprived the complainant of the freedom to make an informed choice, thus negating consent under section 74. The judge was correct to leave the issue to the jury, and there was sufficient evidence for the jury to conclude that the complainant did not consent to the filming or the sexual touching.
Source excerpt
Although the sentences were lenient and the categorisation of harm could have been higher, the judge's nuanced assessment of harm and culpability, particularly in ARY's case, was justified given the facts, vulnerabilities, and impact on the child. The court declined to interfere with the sentences, finding them calibrated to the highly unusual circumstances.
Source excerpt
The trial judge was correct to refuse leave to cross-examine the complainant about subsequent incidents of alleged sexual behaviour, as the similarities were insufficient and lacked chronological nexus; the refusal did not render the jury's verdict unsafe. The sentences imposed, including the extended sentence for X, were justified given the severity and campaign nature of offending, except for certain counts where extended sentences were quashed and replaced with determinate terms due to statutory requirements.
Source excerpt
The trial judge erred in law by failing to consider whether the independent evidence was capable of showing the complainant lacked capacity to consent, and by treating it solely as undermining the prosecution case; the ruling that neither accused had a case to answer was not reasonable and must be reversed.
Source excerpt
The claimant is entitled to damages for sexual abuse perpetrated by the defendant, as proved by criminal convictions and unchallenged evidence. The abuse caused severe and prolonged psychiatric injury, ruined education, and loss of earning capacity. Damages are assessed in accordance with the Judicial College Guidelines and expert evidence.
Source excerpt
The original sentence was unduly lenient due to significant planning, severe psychological harm, multiple aggravating factors, and insufficient reduction for youth; the appropriate sentence for an adult would be at least fifteen years, reduced by 40% for age, resulting in nine years' detention.
Source excerpt
The amendment of the indictment was proper and caused no injustice; the evidence was sufficient to sustain the amended indictment; all procedural steps were fair; and the sentence imposed was just, proportionate, and within the appropriate range given the seriousness and multiplicity of the offences.
Source excerpt
BRS v Gadd [2024] EWHC 1403 (KB) (11 June 2024)
Default judgment damages were assessed for sexual abuse suffered by the claimant at age 12, with awards for general damages, injury to feelings, loss of earnings, and therapy.
The Court of Appeal refused the Attorney General’s reference, holding that Nicole Lines’ suspended sentence for sexual activity with a child was not unduly lenient.
Explore more
