- Registrar of Criminal Appeals’ role in reopening final appeals (R v Cunningham)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- The registrar’s powers
- Applications to be dealt with by the full court
- Loss of time orders
- Nature of the jurisdiction and the s 56(2) point
- Case details
Corporate Crime analysis: In affirming the principles by which the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) should proceed in deciding whether to exercise its inherent jurisdiction to reopen a criminal appeal, as set out in Taylor v Lawrence, Yasain, Hockey and Gohil, the court held that the Registrar of Criminal Appeals (registrar) had no power to adjudicate on the merits of such an application. Therefore, an application which complied with the requirements of rule 36.12 of the Criminal Procedure Rules 2015 (CrimPR) should be decided by the Full Court, on paper, unless it decided an oral hearing was required. The court also held that section 29 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968 (CAA 1968) applies to such appeals and a loss of time order might be made in the case of an unmeritorious application. Richard Wormald QC, counsel for the applicants, appointed by the registrar, considers the case.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial