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 tribunal upheld most income tax and VAT assessments against John Smith, finding he continued the accountancy business after its 2003 sale and acted deliberately.
The judge's decision to stay proceedings was unreasonable and premature, as there was insufficient medical evidence to conclude that a fair trial was impossible; adaptations and further medical reports should be considered before a stay is granted.
Source excerpt
HGF, R. v [2026] EWCA Crim 570 (22 April 2026)
The Court of Appeal upheld a stay of sexual assault proceedings after police failed to obtain hotel CCTV that could have tested the complainant’s credibility.
Ali, R. v [2026] EWCA Crim 559 (22 April 2026)
The Court of Appeal upheld Junaid Ali’s burglary and theft convictions, rejecting his argument that the trial should have been stopped when he was arrested during deliberations.
The Court of Appeal upheld a stay of sexual assault proceedings after police failed to preserve potentially crucial hotel CCTV bearing on credibility.
The Court of Appeal upheld a conviction for perverting the course of public justice, finding the judge’s interventions in cross-examination were proper and fair.
Sousa, R. v [2026] EWCA Crim 585 (21 April 2026)
The Court of Appeal dismissed Anthony Jesus Sousa’s conviction appeal for perverting the course of justice, holding that the trial judge’s interventions and summing-up were fair.
The Court of Appeal set aside a stay of rape and sexual assault proceedings, holding that police delays and missing material did not make a fair trial impossible.
Mohammed, R. v [2026] EWCA Crim 340 (05 March 2026)
The Court of Appeal upheld Riaz Mohammed’s drug-conspiracy convictions, holding the judge was right to refuse the jury copies of defence speeches and no unfairness arose.
The court found that the funding arrangement did not offend the court's sense of justice or undermine public confidence in the criminal justice system. The SSA was transparent, did not compromise police independence, and did not create improper prioritisation or bias. The judge was entitled to refuse a stay of prosecution, regardless of the lawfulness of the SSA.
Source excerpt
Explore more
