Source: https://jimmeyer.co.uk/case-law/s-1/
Timestamp: 2020-04-01 05:33:10
Document Index: 15049608

Matched Legal Cases: ['art.5', 'art.6', 'art.8', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'UKSC ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ']

[2017] EWHC 410 (Admin)
QBD (Admin) (Morris J)
The claim of a prisoner detained in a hospital that the Lord Chancellor’s powers under the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 were to be interpreted so as to give effect to a right to free legal representation by a lawyer of his choice in tribunal proceedings under ECHR art.5(4), art.6 or art.8 was unarguable.
[2017] EWCA Crim 1000
CA (Crim Div) (McCombe LJ, Haddon-Cave J, Judge Batty QC)
The court upheld a conviction for damaging property contrary to the Criminal Damage Act 1971 s.1(1) where the judge had given an appropriate direction as to lawful excuse and had correctly observed that no case on s.5(2) properly arose on the evidence.
[2016] EWCA Crim 1617
CA (Civ Div) (Davis LJ, Birss J, Judge Rook QC)
Offences under the Trade Marks Act 1994 s.92 extended not just to counterfeit goods but also to “grey goods”, namely goods where the trade mark had been affixed with the proprietor’s consent, but where the proprietor had not consented to their sale, distribution or possession by others.
[2016] NICA 40
CA (NI) (Gillen LJ, Weatherup LJ, O'Hara J)
The Northern Ireland Court of Appeal did not have jurisdiction to re-open six appeals against conviction arising out of the Supreme Court’s judgment in R. v Jogee (Ameen Hassan) [2016] UKSC 8 which clarified the law on accessory liability. Putting the law right did not render all convictions invalid which had been arrived at over many years by faithfully applying the law as had been laid down in previous authorities. The appropriate recourse was for the defendants to refer their cases to the Criminal Cases Review Commission.
[2016] EWHC 2471 (Admin)
QBD (Admin) (Gross LJ, Andrews J)
The court reiterated that there was a “very high hurdle” to overcome when seeking to challenge a decision of investigators of the Serious Fraud Office. While none of the authorities precluded a challenge, they lent no encouragement to the bringing of any such challenge.
[2016] EWHC 2057 (Admin)
QBD (Admin) (Whipple J)
[2016] EWHC 2597 (Admin)
QBD (Admin) (Green J)
[2016] EWCA Crim 745
CA (Crim Div) (Treacy LJ, Elisabeth Laing J, Judge Inman QC)
[2016] EWCA Crim 443
CA (Crim Div) (Treacy LJ, Cooke J, Judge Munro QC)
[2016] EWCA Crim 569
CA (Crim Div) (Hallett LJ, Jeremy Baker J, Judge Bourne-Arton QC)