29 Jun 2010
Leave to appeal was dismissed because the Court of Appeal correctly found that the alleged omissions in the summing-up were not material in the context of overwhelming evidence and that the directions and questionnaire did not create a real danger of undue pressure on the jury; accordingly there was no substantial and grave injustice.
24 Jul 2009
The court held that although the trial judge's summing-up was brief and departed from the orthodox compartmentalised approach, it fairly directed the jury on the law and adequately placed the main features of each defendant's defence given the failure of appellants to particularise material omissions; the judge's majority-vote directions were not fatal because there was no real danger the jury were improperly pressured; convictions were therefore affirmed; sentencing appeals succeeded in part where appellate court found insufficient differentiation of culpability and substituted reduced sente…
30 Mar 2007
Leave to appeal was refused because the alleged defects in the trial judge's lies and majority verdict directions were not reasonably arguable to have caused substantial and grave injustice and were within acceptable norms of trial direction, such that no arguable miscarriage of justice was shown.