CK, R v [2008] NICA 31 (30 May 2008)

CK, R v [2008] NICA 31 (30 May 2008)

A retrial is appropriate as no particular unfairness to the appellant has been demonstrated, the offences are serious, and the quashing of convictions was due to evidential exclusion and not insufficiency of evidence. The convention against repeated retrials is not absolute and does not preclude a retrial in these circumstances.

Citation
[2008] NICA 31
Parties
Prosecution: The Queen; Appellant: CK
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
30 May 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Post Conviction, Retrial Application After Convictions Quashed
Outcome
retrial ordered
Legal Topics
Retrial, Quashed Conviction, Jury Directions, Credibility of Complainant, Inconsistent Verdicts
Criminal Law Retrial Quashed Conviction Jury Directions Credibility of Complainant Inconsistent Verdicts

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen

Prosecution

CK

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Post Conviction, Retrial Application After Convictions Quashed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a retrial should be ordered after convictions were quashed
  2. 2 Appropriate jury directions regarding credibility and inconsistent verdicts

Ratio Decidendi

A retrial is appropriate as no particular unfairness to the appellant has been demonstrated, the offences are serious, and the quashing of convictions was due to evidential exclusion and not insufficiency of evidence. The convention against repeated retrials is not absolute and does not preclude a retrial in these circumstances.

Court Disposition

retrial ordered

Orders

  • A retrial is to take place.