Warren v Att. Gen. [2012] 2 JLR 286 (18 October 2012)

Warren v Att. Gen. [2012] 2 JLR 286 (18 October 2012)

The accused is not entitled to be present at the hearing of the Attorney General's application to prevent contact with a juror, as art. 72 and ECHR art. 6 do not require presence at such proceedings.

Citation
[2012] 2 JLR 286
Parties
Accused: Warren; Applicant: Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
18 October 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Procedure / Interlocutory Application
Outcome
application granted
Legal Topics
Right to Be Present, Jury Proceedings, Application to Prevent Contact With Juror, Interpretation of Loi (1864) Reglant La Procedure Criminelle Art. 72, ECHR Art. 6
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Right to Be Present Jury Proceedings Application to Prevent Contact With Juror Interpretation of Loi (1864) Reglant La Procedure Criminelle Art. 72 ECHR Art. 6

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Warren

Accused

Attorney General

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Procedure / Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused is entitled to be present at the hearing of an application by the Attorney General to prevent contact with a juror
  2. 2 Interpretation of the right to be present under Loi (1864) reglant la Procedure Criminelle, art. 72
  3. 3 Scope of ECHR art. 6 regarding presence at proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The accused is not entitled to be present at the hearing of the Attorney General's application to prevent contact with a juror, as art. 72 and ECHR art. 6 do not require presence at such proceedings.

Court Disposition

application granted

Orders

  • The accused is not entitled to be present at the hearing of the application to prevent contact with a juror.