AG -v- Michel [2011] JRC 056 (11 March 2011)

AG -v- Michel [2011] JRC 056 (11 March 2011)

The proposed amendments do not involve substantive changes to the offence, merely relabel the same alleged conduct, and will not cause injustice to the defendant; therefore, leave to amend is granted.

Citation
[2011] JRC 056
Parties
Applicant: Crown Advocate; Respondent: Defendant
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
11 March 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Application for Leave to Amend Indictment
Outcome
leave to amend indictment granted
Legal Topics
Amendment of Indictment, Attempting to Pervert the Course of Justice
Criminal Law Amendment of Indictment Attempting to Pervert the Course of Justice

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Crown Advocate

Applicant

Defendant

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Application for Leave to Amend Indictment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proposed amendments to the indictment constitute substantive changes to the offence charged
  2. 2 Whether leave should be granted to amend the indictment

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed amendments do not involve substantive changes to the offence, merely relabel the same alleged conduct, and will not cause injustice to the defendant; therefore, leave to amend is granted.

Court Disposition

leave to amend indictment granted

Orders

  • Leave granted for the amendments to the indictment to be made.