1998/58 - AG v Young and Williams [1998] UR 58 (24 March 1998)

1998/58 - AG v Young and Williams [1998] UR 58 (24 March 1998)

The proper course is to maintain the traditional practice whereby the Bailiff or his deputy retires with the Jurats when questions of fact are to be decided, ensuring both the Jurats' primary responsibility and the Bailiff's statutory role are respected.

Citation
[1998] UR 58
Parties
Applicant: Snooks; Respondent: Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
24 March 1998
Procedural Posture
Judicial Ruling / Interlocutory
Outcome
Ruling delivered; traditional practice to be maintained.
Legal Topics
Role of Bailiff, Jurat Deliberations, Royal Court Practice
Criminal Procedure Judicial Practice Role of Bailiff Jurat Deliberations Royal Court Practice

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Snooks

Applicant

Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Ruling / Interlocutory

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Bailiff should retire with the Jurats to consider the verdict in Inferior Number trials

Ratio Decidendi

The proper course is to maintain the traditional practice whereby the Bailiff or his deputy retires with the Jurats when questions of fact are to be decided, ensuring both the Jurats' primary responsibility and the Bailiff's statutory role are respected.

Court Disposition

Ruling delivered; traditional practice to be maintained.

Orders

  • The Bailiff or his deputy shall continue to retire with the Jurats in Inferior Number trials when questions of fact are to be decided.