Practice and Procedure

R (on the application of CROWN PROSECUTION SERVICE) (CLAIMANT) v UXBRIDGE MAGISTRATES' COURT (DEFENDANT) & MARK GORE (INTERESTED PARTY) (2007)

PUBLISHED January 16, 2007
SHARE

[2007] EWHC 205 (Admin)

A magistrates' court had erred in law by failing to differentiate between an application to admit a complainant's evidence as hearsay evidence pursuant to the Criminal Justice Act 2003 s.116 and an earlier unsuccessful application to adjourn the trial of the interested party, and in failing to address its mind at all to the application under s.116.

DC (Scott Baker LJ, David Clarke J)

16/01/2007

CATEGORIES