AG -v- Michel [2011] JRC 016B (20 January 2011)

AG -v- Michel [2011] JRC 016B (20 January 2011)

A decision as to whether the acts complained of are capable of perverting the course of justice should be determined when the factual matrix has been laid, at the conclusion of the prosecution's case. The application for a ruling at this stage is declined.

Citation
[2011] JRC 016B
Parties
Defendant: Justin Peter Michel; Third Party: Peter Michel; Crown Advocate: Crown Advocate Whelan
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
20 January 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Application / Pre Trial Interlocutory Application
Outcome
application declined
Legal Topics
Perverting the Course of Justice, Confiscation of Assets, Evidentiary Rulings
Criminal Law Perverting the Course of Justice Confiscation of Assets Evidentiary Rulings

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 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Justin Peter Michel

Defendant

Peter Michel

Third Party

Crown Advocate Whelan

Crown Advocate

Procedural Posture

Criminal Application / Pre Trial Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the acts complained of are capable of having the requisite tendency to pervert the course of justice

Ratio Decidendi

A decision as to whether the acts complained of are capable of perverting the course of justice should be determined when the factual matrix has been laid, at the conclusion of the prosecution's case. The application for a ruling at this stage is declined.

Court Disposition

application declined

Orders

  • No ruling made at this stage; prosecution may proceed as proposed.