Practice and Procedure

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS V CHRISTOPHER COSIER (2000)

PUBLISHED April 5, 2000
SHARE

Where magistrates had of their own motion formed the view that there was no case to answer they should have allowed submissions on that preliminary view from the party whom the decision was provisionally against. It had not been open to the magistrates to simply consider the truth of the answers given in police interview and the questions posed to the prosecution witnesses in cross-examination at trial when deciding whether there was a case to answer, as this was inconsistent with the requirement to hold a fair balance.

DC (Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Astill J)

05/04/2000

CATEGORIES