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 hearing on 28th April 2023 was not a preparatory hearing as required by statute and rules; no formal order or announcement was made to that effect. Therefore, the Court of Appeal has no jurisdiction to hear the interlocutory appeal against the evidentiary ruling made at that hearing.
Source excerpt
Miah, R. v [2023] EWCA Crim 928 (18 July 2023)
The Court of Appeal held it had no jurisdiction to hear an interlocutory appeal because the challenged ruling was not made at a preparatory hearing.
M, R. v [2021] EWCA Crim 1934 (17 December 2021)
The Court of Appeal held that section 78 PACE cannot be used to exclude otherwise admissible evidence solely to protect a defendant from personal safety risks.
AJ, R. v [2019] EWCA Crim 647 (11 April 2019)
The Court of Appeal refused leave to challenge a refusal to stay terrorism charges as an abuse of process, holding the prosecution was not an affront to justice.
Quillan & Ors, R. v [2015] EWCA Crim 538 (25 March 2015)
The Court of Appeal dismissed the prosecution’s appeal against no-case rulings in a pension-fraud case, holding the appeal was properly brought but the counts remained unsustainable.
The Court of Appeal held it lacked jurisdiction over an interlocutory appeal because the case was not a valid preparatory hearing. It also found the hearsay ruling flawed.
The Court of Appeal refused leave to appeal against a preparatory hearing ruling, holding that the abuse of process issue did not raise an appealable question of law.
VJA, R v [2010] EWCA Crim 2742 (19 November 2010)
The Court of Appeal refused leave to appeal against a preparatory hearing ruling, holding there was no appealable question of law and that a stay was unwarranted.
The Court of Appeal upheld the admissibility of low-copy-number DNA evidence, holding that reliability mattered more than quantity, and quashed a wrongly made preparatory hearing order.
C, R. v [2010] EWCA Crim 2578 (04 November 2010)
The Court of Appeal held that DNA evidence may be admissible below the stochastic threshold if reliable, and quashed a wrongly ordered preparatory hearing.
Explore more
