header-logo header-logo

Slim grounds for review at the Privy Council

23 May 2025 / Dr Ping-fat Sze
Issue: 8117 / Categories: Features , Profession , International , Public , Criminal
printer mail-detail
219526
Dr Ping-fat Sze is perplexed by the treatment of irrational prosecutorial decisions
  • The recent Privy Council decision in DPP v Durham renders prosecutorial decisions reviewable on the ground of illegality. Irrationality and abuse of process do not amount to exceptional circumstances for judicial review.
  • In practice, judicial review has no role when challenging criminal prosecutions. Such challenges should be raised in the trial.

In its latest decision on the reviewability of prosecutorial decisions in Trinidad and Tobago, DPP v Durham [2024] UKPC 21, the Privy Council reiterated its decision in Sharma v Brown-Antoine [2006] UKPC 57, thus rendering judicial review virtually irrelevant when challenging criminal prosecutions.

Both decisions maintained that such challenges be conveniently and effectively raised in the trial and determined by the criminal court (see also Mohit v DPP [2006] UKPC 20).

The decision in Durham again endorsed the Fijian supreme court decision in Matalulu v DPP [2003] 2 HKC 457 as representing the applicable law. Nevertheless, the Privy Council

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

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 dangers of uncritical artificial intelligence (AI) use in legal practice are no longer hypothetical. In this week's NLJ, Dr Charanjit Singh of Holborn Chambers examines cases where lawyers relied on ‘hallucinated’ citations — entirely fictitious authorities generated by AI tools
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
back-to-top-scroll