header-logo header-logo

Criminal Litigation

03 January 2008 / Peter Hungerford-welch
Issue: 7302 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Crown Court [2007] EWHC 2804 (Admin), [2007] All ER (D) 283 (Oct)

 This case concerned extension of the custody time limit under the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985, s 22(3) in circumstances where delay had been caused  by listing difficulties at the crown court. 

 

HELD Where there are real pressures on a court which have been created by exceptional circum­stances, the court should be careful to examine what the reason is and the proposed solution to it and come to a judgment as to whether or not it can properly be said that the reason is one which is exceptional and that the steps that are proposed to alleviate it appear to have a prospect of success (per Lord Justice Latham at para 18).

Issue: 7302 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll