Where a submission of no case to answer would have been successful but the prosecution were allowed to amend the indictment after the close of its case, a retrial should not have been ordered where evidence on the amended indictment was deemed inadmissible because it had already been heard by the jury. To do so was an abuse of process.

CA (Crim Div) (Waller LJ, Timothy Walker J, Judge Michael Hyam)

18/03/1999