Bradley, R v [2013] NICA 36 (24 June 2013)

Bradley, R v [2013] NICA 36 (24 June 2013)

The court found that alleged incompetence of counsel, investigative and prosecutorial failures, admission of hearsay evidence, and disclosure issues did not render the conviction unsafe or breach the applicant's right to a fair trial under Article 6 ECHR. Tactical decisions by counsel were within reasonable bounds...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2013] NICA 36
Parties
Prosecution: The Queen; Applicant: Michael Christopher Bradley
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
24 June 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Sexual Offences, Indecent Assault, Gross Indecency, Buggery, Assault, Right to Fair Trial, Incompetence of Counsel, Hearsay Evidence, Disclosure Obligations
Criminal Law Human Rights Law Sexual Offences Indecent Assault Gross Indecency Buggery Assault Right to Fair Trial +3 more

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen

Prosecution

Michael Christopher Bradley

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether incompetence of counsel rendered the conviction unsafe
  2. 2 Whether failures in investigation and prosecution breached fair trial rights
  3. 3 Whether hearsay evidence was wrongly admitted

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that alleged incompetence of counsel, investigative and prosecutorial failures, admission of hearsay evidence, and disclosure issues did not render the conviction unsafe or breach the applicant's right to a fair trial under Article 6 ECHR. Tactical decisions by counsel were within reasonable bounds and did not prejudice the applicant's defence.

Court Disposition

leave to appeal refused