1
LAW (9084)
Paper 1 (English Legal System)
1.2 Machinery Of Justice
By: Hassaan Ahmed Chaudhary
2
1.2.1 Civil Courts and Civil Process
Role and Jurisdiction of Magistrates’ Court, County Court, High
Court, Court of Appeal, Supreme Court
Introduction:
The civil courts in England and Wales form an essential part of the machinery of justice. They provide
a forum for resolving disputes between individuals and organizations in non-criminal matters. Each
court has its role, jurisdiction, and powers. Understanding the distinct functions and hierarchies of
these courts is crucial in navigating the civil justice system effectively.
1. Magistrates' Court:
● Role: Magistrates' Courts are the lowest level of court in the civil justice system. They
primarily deal with less serious civil cases and act as a first point of contact for many legal
disputes.
● Jurisdiction: The jurisdiction of Magistrates' Courts extends to a wide range of civil matters,
including small claims, housing disputes, debt recovery, and family law issues.
● Powers: Magistrates' Courts have the power to make judgments, issue orders, and impose
penalties within their jurisdiction. They can also refer more complex cases to higher courts.
2. County Court:
● Role: County Courts are the intermediate level of civil courts and handle a broader range of
civil disputes compared to Magistrates' Courts. They provide a forum for resolving more
substantial claims and legal issues.
● Jurisdiction: County Courts have jurisdiction over various civil matters, such as contract
disputes, personal injury claims, land disputes, and consumer issues.
● Powers: County Courts have the authority to hear cases, make judgments, issue injunctions,
award damages, and enforce court orders within their jurisdiction.
3. High Court:
● Role: The High Court is a superior court of record and deals with more complex and
higher-value civil cases. It is divided into three divisions: the Queen's Bench Division, the
Chancery Division, and the Family Division.
● Jurisdiction: The High Court has jurisdiction over a wide range of civil matters, including
serious contractual disputes, land disputes, complex tort claims, judicial review, and
intellectual property cases.
● Powers: The High Court has extensive powers to hear and determine cases, grant injunctions,
award substantial damages, and enforce judgments.
4. Court of Appeal:
● Role: The Court of Appeal is an appellate court that reviews decisions made by lower courts.
It primarily focuses on correcting errors of law and ensuring consistency in the application of
legal principles.
● Jurisdiction: The Court of Appeal has jurisdiction over appeals from the High Court and
certain decisions from the County Court, as well as some specialized tribunals.
● Powers: The Court of Appeal has the authority to hear and determine appeals, set aside or
uphold lower court judgments, and make binding decisions on points of law.
5. Supreme Court:
● Role: The Supreme Court is the highest court in the United Kingdom and serves as the final
court of appeal for civil cases in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland.
3
●
Jurisdiction: The Supreme Court has jurisdiction over appeals from the Court of Appeal and,
in some cases, directly from the High Court. It also deals with important constitutional and
legal matters.
● Powers: The Supreme Court has the power to hear and determine appeals, interpret laws,
provide authoritative legal guidance, and set legal precedents.
Conclusion:
The civil courts in England and Wales, including the Magistrates' Court, County Court, High Court,
Court of Appeal, and Supreme Court, each have distinct roles, jurisdictions, and powers.
Understanding the hierarchy and functions of these courts is essential in accessing justice and
resolving civil disputes effectively. From the initial stage of small claims to complex matters on
appeal, the civil court system provides a comprehensive framework for the fair and impartial
resolution of civil disputes.
The Woolf Reforms
Introduction:
The Woolf Reforms, also known as the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) reforms, were introduced in
1999 with the aim of improving the civil justice system in England and Wales. These reforms were a
response to the concerns about the cost, delay, and complexity of civil litigation, and they sought to
promote access to justice, efficiency, and proportionality in civil proceedings.
Overview of the Woolf Reforms:
The key objectives of the Woolf Reforms were to:
a) Simplify and streamline civil court procedures.
b) Encourage early settlement and alternative dispute resolution methods.
c) Reduce the cost and duration of litigation.
d) Enhance access to justice for all parties involved.
Key Changes Introduced by the Woolf Reforms:
1. Pre-Action Protocols:
● Pre-action protocols were established to encourage parties to exchange information and
attempt settlement before commencing formal litigation.
● The protocols outline the steps and information that parties should follow and provide in
specific types of cases, such as personal injury, construction disputes, and professional
negligence claims.
2. Case Management:
● Case management became a central feature of civil litigation, with judges taking an active
role in managing cases from the outset.
● The courts now have the power to set timetables, give directions, and control the progress of
cases to ensure effective case management.
3. Overriding Objective:
● The concept of the "overriding objective" was introduced to ensure that cases are dealt with
justly, proportionately, and expeditiously.
● This objective requires the court to consider factors such as the parties' resources, the
importance of the case, and the need to allocate resources proportionately.
4. Proportionality:
● The principle of proportionality was emphasized, requiring the costs incurred in litigation to
be proportionate to the value and complexity of the case.
● Courts have the power to control and limit costs to prevent disproportionate expenditure.
4
5. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR):
● The Woolf Reforms encouraged parties to consider alternative dispute resolution methods,
such as mediation and arbitration, as alternatives to traditional litigation.
● ADR methods aim to facilitate settlement and reduce the burden on the court system.
6. Fast Track, Multi-Track, and Small Claims Track:
● The Woolf Reforms introduced a case management system based on tracks to allocate cases to
the appropriate level of court.
● The fast track is for simpler, lower-value claims, the multi-track is for more complex and
higher-value cases, and the small claims track is for small-value disputes.
Conclusion:
The Woolf Reforms brought significant changes to the civil justice system in England and Wales. By
promoting early settlement, improving case management, emphasizing proportionality, and
encouraging alternative dispute resolution, these reforms aimed to make civil litigation more
accessible, efficient, and cost-effective. The introduction of pre-action protocols, the overriding
objective, and the tracks system provided a structured framework for managing civil cases. The Woolf
Reforms have had a lasting impact on civil procedure, shaping the way civil disputes are resolved and
contributing to the overall effectiveness of the civil courts.
Pre-trial Procedures
Introduction:
Pre-trial procedures are an essential part of the civil litigation process in England and Wales. These
procedures aim to ensure that the parties are adequately prepared for trial, promote the efficient
resolution of disputes, and facilitate the fair and just administration of justice. This section will
explore the key pre-trial procedures involved in civil cases.
1. Pleadings:
● Pleadings are formal written statements filed by the parties to define and clarify the issues
in dispute.
● The claimant initiates the proceedings by filing a statement of claim, setting out the facts,
legal grounds, and remedy sought.
● The defendant then files a statement of defense, responding to the claimant's allegations and
setting out any counterclaims or defenses.
● Further pleadings, such as replies and particulars, may be filed to provide additional
information or respond to specific allegations.
2. Disclosure:
● Disclosure refers to the process of exchanging relevant documents and information between
the parties.
● The court may order standard disclosure, where each party discloses the documents on which
they rely and those that harm or support their case.
● Enhanced disclosure or specific disclosure may be ordered for more complex cases, requiring
the parties to disclose additional documents or categories of documents.
3. Witness Statements:
● Witness statements are written statements prepared by the parties' witnesses, setting out their
evidence and their understanding of the facts.
● Witness statements provide an opportunity for the parties to present their case through the
testimony of witnesses.
5
●
The witness statements are usually exchanged before trial to allow the parties to understand
the evidence that will be presented.
4. Expert Evidence:
● In some cases, expert evidence may be necessary to assist the court in understanding complex
technical or scientific matters.
● Experts are appointed by the parties or the court and provide their opinions on specific issues
within their area of expertise.
● The court may impose restrictions on the number of experts and the issues they can address.
5. Pre-trial Review:
● A pre-trial review is a hearing conducted by the court to review and manage the progress of
the case before trial.
● The court may identify and resolve any outstanding issues, clarify the scope of the trial, and
ensure that the parties are adequately prepared.
6. Settlement and Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR):
● Parties are encouraged to explore settlement options and consider alternative dispute
resolution methods, such as mediation or negotiation, to resolve their dispute without
proceeding to trial.
● The court may also facilitate settlement discussions and encourage the parties to engage in
ADR processes.
Conclusion:
Pre-trial procedures play a crucial role in civil litigation, ensuring that the parties have a clear
understanding of the issues in dispute, exchanging relevant information, and preparing for trial.
Pleadings, disclosure, witness statements, and expert evidence enable the parties to present their cases
and provide the court with the necessary information to make informed decisions. The pre-trial review
helps manage the progress of the case and address any outstanding issues. Additionally, settlement
discussions and alternative dispute resolution methods offer opportunities for the parties to reach a
resolution without the need for a trial. Overall, these pre-trial procedures contribute to the fair and
efficient resolution of civil disputes in the civil courts of England and Wales.
Allocation of Cases - Small Claims, Fast and Multi-Track
Introduction:
In civil litigation, the allocation of cases is an important process that determines the appropriate track
for each case based on its complexity and value. This section focuses on the allocation of cases in the
civil courts, including small claims, fast track, and multi-track.
1. Small Claims:
● Small claims are cases involving relatively low monetary value and straightforward legal
issues.
● The small claims track is designed to provide a simplified and cost-effective process for
resolving disputes.
● The current financial limit for small claims is £10,000 in England and Wales (subject to
periodic review).
● In small claims, the parties usually represent themselves, and formal legal representation is
discouraged.
● The procedure is informal, and the court aims to promote direct communication between the
parties to reach a resolution.
2. Fast Track:
6
●
The fast track is for cases that are more complex than small claims but do not require the
resources and procedures of the multi-track.
● Fast track cases typically involve higher monetary values, generally between £10,000 and
£25,000.
● The court sets strict timetables for fast track cases to ensure their expeditious resolution.
● Parties are expected to comply with deadlines and court directions promptly.
● The court aims to limit the length of the trial and minimize costs while ensuring a fair hearing.
3. Multi-Track:
● The multi-track is for cases of significant complexity, higher monetary value, or substantial
legal issues.
● Multi-track cases may involve claims exceeding £25,000, complex legal questions, or
extensive evidence.
● The court provides greater case management and flexibility to accommodate the complexities
of multi-track cases.
● Parties may be represented by legal professionals, and the court may allow more extensive
disclosure, expert evidence, and longer trial durations.
● The court closely monitors the progress of multi-track cases to ensure fair and efficient
resolution.
4. Allocation Decision:
● The allocation of cases is determined by the court, usually at an allocation hearing or as part
of case management.
● The court considers various factors when deciding the appropriate track, including the value,
complexity, and importance of the case.
● The court also considers the parties' resources, their legal representation, and any specific
issues or circumstances of the case.
● The allocation decision aims to ensure that cases are handled in the most appropriate track to
achieve a fair and efficient resolution.
Conclusion:
The allocation of cases in civil courts plays a vital role in ensuring the effective administration of
justice. Small claims provide a simplified process for low-value and straightforward disputes,
encouraging self-representation and direct communication between the parties. The fast track is
designed for moderately complex cases that require a streamlined procedure, strict timetables, and
cost efficiency. The multi-track accommodates cases of significant complexity and higher value,
allowing for more extensive procedures, legal representation, and case management. The allocation
decision considers various factors to determine the appropriate track for each case, aiming to promote
fairness, efficiency, and access to justice.
Appeals
Introduction:
In the English legal system, the right to appeal is an essential part of ensuring justice. Appeals allow
parties to challenge decisions made by lower courts or tribunals if they believe there has been an error
in law or procedure. This section focuses on the appeals process in civil cases, outlining the types of
appeals and the procedures involved.
1. Types of Appeals:
● Appeals in civil cases can generally be categorized into two types: appeals from the County
Court and appeals from the High Court.
7
●
Appeals from the County Court are usually heard in the Court of Appeal, while appeals from
the High Court are typically heard in the Civil Division of the Court of Appeal or the
Supreme Court.
● There are also certain specialized tribunals or administrative bodies with their own appeal
procedures, such as the Employment Appeal Tribunal or the Upper Tribunal.
2. Grounds of Appeal:
● To succeed in an appeal, the appellant (the party appealing) must demonstrate that there has
been an error of law or procedure in the lower court's decision.
● Errors of law may include misinterpretation of statutes, incorrect application of legal
principles, or failure to consider relevant legal authorities.
● Errors of procedure may include a failure to follow the proper rules of evidence, denying the
right to a fair hearing, or procedural irregularities that may have affected the outcome of the
case.
3. The Appeals Process:
● The appeals process begins with the appellant filing a notice of appeal within the specified
time limit, usually 21 days from the date of the decision.
● The appellant must also submit grounds of appeal, setting out the specific errors of law or
procedure they rely on.
● The respondent (the opposing party) may file a respondent's notice, presenting arguments
against the appeal or cross-appealing on different grounds.
● Once the necessary documents are filed, the court will consider whether the appeal has
sufficient merit to proceed to a hearing.
● If the appeal is allowed to proceed, the court will schedule a hearing date and provide
directions for the preparation of the appeal bundle and written submissions.
4. The Appeal Hearing:
● The appeal hearing is an opportunity for the appellant and respondent to present their
arguments before the appellate court.
● The appellant's legal team will present their case, focusing on the errors of law or procedure
identified in the grounds of appeal.
● The respondent's legal team will respond to the appellant's arguments and may present their
own arguments if they have cross-appealed.
● The appellate court will consider the written submissions, legal authorities, and oral
arguments presented by both parties.
● The court may ask questions, seek clarifications, and engage in legal analysis to determine
whether the lower court's decision should be upheld, varied, or overturned.
5. The Decision and Remedies:
● After hearing the appeal, the appellate court will deliver its decision, typically in the form of a
written judgment.
● The court may uphold the lower court's decision, allowing it to stand, or it may overturn the
decision and substitute its own decision.
● In some cases, the court may remit the case back to the lower court for reconsideration or
order a retrial.
● Depending on the circumstances, the court may also grant specific remedies, such as
damages, injunctions, or declarations.
Conclusion:
The appeals process in civil cases provides a mechanism for parties to challenge decisions they
believe to be legally or procedurally flawed. Through the appeals process, errors of law or procedure
can be rectified, ensuring the fair administration of justice. The process involves filing a notice of
8
appeal, presenting grounds of appeal, and participating in an appeal hearing before the appellate court.
The court carefully considers the arguments, legal authorities, and submissions of the parties before
delivering its decision. Successful appeals may result in the reversal, variation, or remission of the
lower court's decision, and the court may also grant appropriate remedies. The appeals process plays a
crucial role in maintaining the integrity and accountability of the civil justice system.
1.2.2 Alternative Methods of Dispute Resolution
Negotiation, Conciliation, and Mediation
Introduction:
In addition to traditional litigation in courts, alternative methods of dispute resolution have gained
prominence as effective means of resolving conflicts. This section focuses on negotiation,
conciliation, and mediation as alternative methods of dispute resolution, highlighting their processes,
characteristics, and advantages.
1. Negotiation:
● Negotiation is a voluntary process in which parties involved in a dispute attempt to reach a
mutually acceptable resolution without the involvement of a third party.
● It is an informal and flexible method that allows parties to discuss their issues, exchange
offers, and engage in direct communication.
● The negotiation process is often guided by legal advisors or representatives who help the
parties identify their interests, explore potential solutions, and negotiate the terms of a
settlement agreement.
● Negotiation is based on the principle of party autonomy, meaning the parties have control
over the outcome and can tailor the settlement to their specific needs.
2. Conciliation:
● Conciliation involves the assistance of a neutral third party, known as a conciliator, who
facilitates the resolution of a dispute between the parties.
● The conciliator's role is to promote communication, encourage cooperation, and assist the
parties in finding common ground.
● Unlike a mediator, a conciliator may take a more active role by suggesting possible solutions,
providing expert advice, and proposing compromises.
● The conciliation process is confidential, and the conciliator does not impose a binding
decision on the parties. Instead, the parties have the final say in accepting or rejecting the
proposed settlement.
3. Mediation:
● Mediation is a structured process that involves the intervention of a neutral third party, known
as a mediator, who assists the parties in reaching a mutually acceptable resolution.
● The mediator facilitates communication, helps parties identify their interests, and guides them
in generating options for settlement.
● Mediators do not provide legal advice or impose decisions; instead, they empower parties to
make informed choices and work towards a resolution that meets their needs.
● Mediation is a voluntary and confidential process, and the mediator's role is to create a safe
and constructive environment for open dialogue and negotiation.
4. Advantages of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR):
9
●
ADR methods, such as negotiation, conciliation, and mediation, offer several advantages over
traditional litigation:
● Cost-effective: ADR processes are often less expensive than going to court, as they
involve fewer formalities and legal fees.
● Time-efficient: ADR can provide quicker resolutions, allowing parties to avoid the
lengthy court process.
● Preservation of relationships: ADR methods focus on collaboration and
understanding, preserving relationships between parties.
● Confidentiality: ADR processes are generally confidential, ensuring privacy for the
parties involved.
● Flexibility and customization: ADR allows parties to tailor solutions to their
specific needs and interests, promoting satisfaction with the outcome.
● Empowerment: ADR methods empower parties to actively participate in the
resolution process and have control over the outcome.
Conclusion:
Negotiation, conciliation, and mediation are alternative methods of dispute resolution that provide
parties with flexible and collaborative approaches to resolving conflicts. These methods prioritize
open communication, cooperation, and the empowerment of parties to reach mutually agreeable
solutions. By offering cost-effective, time-efficient, and relationship-preserving options, alternative
dispute resolution contributes to a more accessible and responsive justice system.
Arbitration, Arbitration Act 1996, Scott v Avery Clauses
Introduction:
Alternative methods of dispute resolution offer parties an alternative to litigation in court. One such
method is arbitration, which provides a private and legally binding process for resolving disputes.
This section explores arbitration, the Arbitration Act 1996, and the significance of Scott v Avery
clauses in arbitration agreements.
1. Arbitration:
● Arbitration is a method of dispute resolution where parties agree to submit their dispute to an
independent third party, known as an arbitrator or arbitral tribunal.
● The arbitrator acts as a private judge, making a binding decision, known as an arbitral award,
based on the evidence and arguments presented by the parties.
● Arbitration proceedings are governed by the agreement of the parties, typically outlined in an
arbitration agreement or contract clause.
● The process is confidential, and the arbitrator's decision is enforceable in court under the
Arbitration Act 1996.
2. The Arbitration Act 1996:
● The Arbitration Act 1996 is the primary legislation governing arbitration in England, Wales,
and Northern Ireland.
● It provides a comprehensive framework for arbitration proceedings, including the
appointment of arbitrators, the conduct of hearings, the enforcement of awards, and the role of
the courts in supporting and supervising the process.
● The Act incorporates principles of fairness, impartiality, and party autonomy, allowing parties
to tailor the arbitration process to their specific needs.
● It also provides remedies for challenging an award, such as setting aside or appealing the
decision, in limited circumstances.
10
3. Scott v Avery Clauses:
● Scott v Avery clauses, named after the landmark case, refer to contractual clauses that require
parties to submit their disputes to arbitration rather than litigation in court.
● These clauses are often included in commercial agreements and contracts to provide an
alternative means of resolving disputes.
● Scott v Avery clauses are enforceable under the Arbitration Act 1996, and they express the
parties' intention to resolve any disputes through arbitration.
● By including such clauses, parties can benefit from the advantages of arbitration, such as
confidentiality, expertise of arbitrators, and the flexibility of the process.
4. Advantages of Arbitration:
● Confidentiality: Arbitration proceedings are typically confidential, ensuring privacy for the
parties involved and protecting sensitive business information.
● Expertise: Parties can choose arbitrators with specific expertise in the subject matter of the
dispute, ensuring a decision based on specialized knowledge.
● Flexibility: Arbitration offers flexibility in terms of the procedural rules, hearing locations,
and the timing of the proceedings, accommodating the parties' preferences.
● Speed and efficiency: Arbitration can be faster and more efficient than litigation, as it avoids
the formalities and delays associated with court processes.
● Enforcement: Arbitral awards are enforceable in court, providing parties with a legally
binding resolution that is readily enforceable domestically and internationally.
Conclusion:
Arbitration, governed by the Arbitration Act 1996, is an alternative method of dispute resolution that
offers parties flexibility, confidentiality, and enforceability. By utilizing Scott v Avery clauses in
contracts, parties can agree to resolve their disputes through arbitration, benefiting from the
advantages it provides. With its emphasis on party autonomy and expert decision-making, arbitration
serves as an essential component of the machinery of justice, offering an efficient and effective means
of resolving disputes outside the traditional court system.
1.2.3 Criminal Courts and Criminal Process
Role and Jurisdiction of Magistrates’ Court and Crown Court
Introduction:
The criminal justice system in England and Wales consists of various courts that handle criminal
cases. This section focuses on the role and jurisdiction of the Magistrates' Court and the Crown Court,
which are the two primary criminal courts in the system. Understanding their functions and powers is
crucial for comprehending the criminal process.
1. Magistrates' Court:
● The Magistrates' Court is the lower criminal court, also known as the summary court or the
court of first instance for most criminal cases.
● It deals with less serious criminal offenses, known as summary offenses, such as minor
assaults, theft, traffic offenses, and public order offenses.
● The court is presided over by magistrates, who are unpaid volunteers or professional
magistrates known as district judges.
● Magistrates' Court has limited sentencing powers, typically imposing fines, community
orders, and short-term custodial sentences (up to 6 months) for single offenses.
11
●
The court also conducts preliminary hearings for more serious cases (indictable offenses) to
determine whether the case should be sent to the Crown Court for trial.
2. Jurisdiction of the Magistrates' Court:
● The Magistrates' Court has jurisdiction over a wide range of criminal cases, including
summary offenses, triable-either-way offenses, and some indictable offenses.
● Summary offenses: These are less serious offenses that are tried and sentenced by the
Magistrates' Court alone.
● Triable-either-way offenses: These are offenses that can be tried either in the Magistrates'
Court or the Crown Court, depending on factors such as the seriousness of the offense and the
defendant's choice.
● Some indictable offenses: The Magistrates' Court deals with preliminary hearings for
indictable offenses to determine whether the case should be sent to the Crown Court for trial.
3. Crown Court:
● The Crown Court is the higher criminal court and deals with more serious criminal cases,
including indictable offenses and appeals from the Magistrates' Court.
● It consists of professional judges, including circuit judges and High Court judges, and a jury
composed of 12 members.
● The Crown Court has greater sentencing powers than the Magistrates' Court, including the
ability to impose longer custodial sentences.
● It conducts trials for indictable offenses, such as murder, rape, serious assaults, drug offenses,
and fraud.
● Appeals from the Magistrates' Court against conviction or sentence are heard in the Crown
Court.
4. Jurisdiction of the Crown Court:
● The Crown Court has jurisdiction over serious criminal cases, including indictable offenses,
which are the most serious offenses under the law.
● Indictable offenses: These offenses are generally more serious in nature and require a trial by
judge and jury in the Crown Court.
● Appeals: The Crown Court hears appeals against conviction or sentence from the
Magistrates' Court.
Conclusion:
The Magistrates' Court and the Crown Court play distinct roles in the criminal justice system. The
Magistrates' Court handles less serious criminal offenses and conducts preliminary hearings for more
serious cases, while the Crown Court deals with indictable offenses and appeals from the Magistrates'
Court. Understanding the jurisdiction and functions of these courts is essential for comprehending the
criminal process and ensuring that justice is served in accordance with the law.
Classification of Criminal Offences - Summary, Triable either
way and indictable
Introduction:
Criminal offenses in England and Wales are classified into different categories based on their
seriousness. These classifications determine the appropriate court for trial and the potential
punishment. This section focuses on the classification of criminal offenses into summary offenses,
triable either way offenses, and indictable offenses.
1. Summary Offenses:
● Summary offenses, also known as minor offenses, are less serious criminal offenses.
12
●
These offenses are heard and decided in the Magistrates' Court, which has limited sentencing
powers.
● Examples of summary offenses include common assault, theft, criminal damage, and
low-level public order offenses.
● The maximum sentence that can be imposed for a summary offense is typically a fine,
community order, or a custodial sentence of up to six months.
2. Triable Either Way Offenses:
● Triable either way offenses are more serious than summary offenses but less serious than
indictable offenses.
● These offenses can be tried in either the Magistrates' Court or the Crown Court, depending on
factors such as the seriousness of the offense and the defendant's choice.
● Examples of triable either way offenses include burglary, certain drug offenses, handling
stolen goods, and some forms of fraud.
● If the defendant elects for trial in the Magistrates' Court, the court will conduct a preliminary
hearing to determine whether the case should be retained or sent to the Crown Court.
● If the Magistrates' Court deems the case too serious for their jurisdiction, it will be sent to the
Crown Court for trial.
3. Indictable Offenses:
● Indictable offenses are the most serious criminal offenses and carry higher maximum
penalties.
● These offenses require a trial in the Crown Court before a judge and jury.
● Examples of indictable offenses include murder, rape, serious assaults, drug trafficking,
robbery, and high-value fraud.
● The Crown Court has the authority to impose more severe sentences, including longer
custodial sentences.
● Indictable offenses are typically accompanied by a more complex and formal legal process
due to their gravity.
4. Decision on Mode of Trial:
● The decision on the mode of trial for triable either way offenses is determined through a
process called "mode of trial proceedings."
● During these proceedings, the Magistrates' Court considers factors such as the nature and
gravity of the offense, the defendant's previous convictions, and any representations made by
the prosecution and defense.
● The court will assess whether the case is suitable for summary trial or should be sent to the
Crown Court for trial.
Conclusion:
Understanding the classification of criminal offenses is essential for determining the appropriate court
for trial and understanding the potential penalties. Summary offenses are heard in the Magistrates'
Court, triable either way offenses can be tried in either the Magistrates' Court or the Crown Court, and
indictable offenses are tried exclusively in the Crown Court. This classification ensures that criminal
cases are handled in a manner commensurate with their seriousness and provides a structured
framework for the criminal justice system.
Pre-trial process for summary, triable either way and indictable
offences
Introduction:
13
Before a criminal case goes to trial in the appropriate court, there are several pre-trial processes that
must be followed. These processes differ depending on the classification of the offense—summary,
triable either way, or indictable. This section explores the pre-trial process for each type of offense.
1. Pre-trial Process for Summary Offences:
● For summary offenses, the pre-trial process is relatively straightforward.
● After the arrest, the defendant is brought before the Magistrates' Court for an initial hearing,
known as the first appearance.
● During the first appearance, the defendant is informed of the charge, and the court ensures
that the defendant understands their rights and the options available to them.
● The court may also consider bail and any conditions that need to be imposed.
● If the defendant pleads guilty, the court proceeds to sentencing.
● If the defendant pleads not guilty, the court sets a trial date and arranges for the gathering of
evidence and witness statements.
2. Pre-trial Process for Triable Either Way Offences:
● For triable either way offenses, the pre-trial process is more complex due to the option of trial
in either the Magistrates' Court or the Crown Court.
● After the first appearance in the Magistrates' Court, if the defendant pleads guilty, the court
may proceed to sentencing or, if the case is particularly serious, refer the case to the Crown
Court for sentencing.
● If the defendant pleads not guilty, the court must decide whether to retain the case or send it to
the Crown Court for trial.
● The court conducts a mode of trial hearing to determine the appropriate court for trial.
● During this hearing, the court considers factors such as the seriousness of the offense, the
defendant's previous convictions, and any representations made by the prosecution and
defense.
● If the Magistrates' Court considers the case suitable for summary trial, it proceeds to trial
preparation.
● If the Magistrates' Court deems the case too serious, it sends the case to the Crown Court for
trial.
3. Pre-trial Process for Indictable Offences:
● Indictable offenses are exclusively tried in the Crown Court, and the pre-trial process reflects
the seriousness and complexity of these cases.
● After the first appearance in the Magistrates' Court, the court transfers the case to the Crown
Court for trial.
● The Crown Court then proceeds with pre-trial procedures, including case management
hearings, where the judge ensures that the case is progressing appropriately and sets deadlines
for the exchange of evidence.
● The court may also conduct a plea and case management hearing, during which the defendant
enters a plea, and the court considers any legal issues that may arise during the trial.
● The court may give directions for the gathering of evidence, the preparation of witness
statements, and the exchange of relevant documents.
Conclusion:
The pre-trial process for criminal offenses varies depending on the classification of the
offense—summary, triable either way, or indictable. The process for summary offenses is relatively
straightforward, while the process for triable either way and indictable offenses involves more
complex decision-making and procedural steps. These pre-trial processes ensure that cases are
appropriately assessed, defendants are informed of their rights, and the necessary preparations are
made for a fair and efficient trial.
14
Appeals
Introduction:
In the criminal justice system, the right to appeal provides an essential mechanism for reviewing and
correcting potential errors or miscarriages of justice. This section explores the process of appeals in
criminal cases, focusing on the different stages and grounds for appeal.
1. Right to Appeal:
● The right to appeal is fundamental to the principle of justice and ensures that individuals have
recourse to a higher court if they believe a decision made in their case is incorrect or unfair.
● The right to appeal exists for both the prosecution and the defense.
● Appeals can be made against convictions, sentences, or both.
2. Appeals from the Magistrates' Court:
● If a case was initially heard in the Magistrates' Court, there are two avenues for appeal: (a) to
the Crown Court, and (b) to the High Court by way of case stated.
(a) Appeals to the Crown Court:
● A defendant dissatisfied with a decision in the Magistrates' Court may appeal to the Crown
Court against either conviction or sentence.
● The appeal is heard by a judge and at least two magistrates.
● The Crown Court may confirm, reverse, or vary the decision of the Magistrates' Court.
● If the Crown Court upholds the appeal against conviction, it may acquit the defendant or order
a retrial.
● If the Crown Court upholds the appeal against sentence, it may reduce or increase the
sentence.
(b) Appeals by way of Case Stated:
● In this type of appeal, a party challenges a decision of law made by the Magistrates' Court.
● The appeal is made to the High Court and is based on a statement of facts agreed upon by
both parties.
● The High Court determines whether the Magistrates' Court made an error in its decision and
may affirm, quash, or vary the decision.
3. Appeals from the Crown Court:
● If a case was initially heard in the Crown Court, there are three avenues for appeal: (a) to the
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division), (b) to the Supreme Court, and (c) to the Criminal Cases
Review Commission (CCRC).
(a) Appeals to the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division):
● Appeals from the Crown Court are heard by the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division).
● The Court of Appeal considers appeals against both conviction and sentence.
● The appeal is usually heard by three judges.
● The Court of Appeal may affirm, reverse, or vary the decision of the Crown Court.
● If the Court of Appeal upholds the appeal against conviction, it may quash the conviction and
order an acquittal or order a retrial.
● If the Court of Appeal upholds the appeal against sentence, it may reduce or increase the
sentence.
(b) Appeals to the Supreme Court:
● Appeals to the Supreme Court can be made on points of law of general public importance.
● The appeal must be certified by the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court itself.
● The Supreme Court has the discretion to hear the appeal and may affirm, reverse, or vary the
decision of the lower court.
(c) Appeals to the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC):
15
●
The CCRC is an independent body that reviews alleged miscarriages of justice in criminal
cases.
● It investigates cases where there may be new evidence or other factors that suggest a possible
wrongful conviction or sentence.
● If the CCRC believes there is a real possibility that the conviction or sentence is unsafe, it
may refer the case back to the Court of Appeal.
Conclusion:
The appeals process in criminal cases provides an avenue for reviewing and rectifying potential errors
or injustices. The right to appeal is crucial in upholding the principles of justice and ensuring that
individuals have recourse if they believe a decision is incorrect or unfair. Whether the appeal is made
from the Magistrates' Court or the Crown Court, the Court of Appeal, the Supreme Court, or the
CCRC, the appeals process plays a vital role in safeguarding the integrity of the criminal justice
system.
Police Bail - Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE),
Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994
Introduction:
Police bail is a crucial aspect of the criminal justice process, allowing the police to release a person
suspected of committing an offense pending further investigation or court proceedings. This section
explores the provisions related to police bail under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984
(PACE) and the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994.
1. Police Bail under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE):
● PACE provides the legal framework for police powers and procedures in England and Wales.
● Section 37 of PACE governs the use of police bail.
2. Granting of Police Bail:
● The police have the discretion to grant bail to a person suspected of committing an offense.
● Bail may be granted at the police station or during the investigation process.
● The decision to grant bail is based on several factors, including the seriousness of the offense,
the suspect's criminal history, the likelihood of the suspect appearing in court, and the risk of
interference with witnesses or evidence.
3. Conditions of Police Bail:
● When granting bail, the police may impose conditions on the suspect.
● Conditions can include surrendering the suspect's passport, reporting to the police station at
specified times, residing at a specific address, or refraining from contacting certain
individuals.
● The conditions aim to ensure the suspect's compliance with bail and prevent any potential
risks, such as interference with the investigation or further criminal activity.
4. Time Limits for Police Bail:
● Initially, there was no statutory time limit for police bail, leading to concerns about lengthy
periods of pre-charge bail.
● However, the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 introduced time limits on police
bail.
● Section 42 of the 1994 Act sets a maximum period of pre-charge bail, which is generally 28
days.
● This time limit can be extended in exceptional circumstances with authorization from a senior
police officer or the courts.
16
5. Review of Police Bail:
● The suspect or their legal representative can request a review of the conditions or duration of
police bail.
● The review is conducted by a senior police officer.
● If the conditions or duration of bail are considered unjustified or excessive, they may be
modified or revoked.
6. Failure to Comply with Police Bail:
● If a suspect fails to comply with the conditions of police bail, they may face additional
criminal charges, such as failure to surrender or breach of bail conditions.
● Non-compliance with police bail can also impact the decision-making process in subsequent
court proceedings.
Conclusion:
Police bail is an essential mechanism in the criminal justice system, allowing the police to release
individuals suspected of committing offenses while ensuring their compliance and managing potential
risks. The provisions under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and the Criminal Justice and
Public Order Act 1994 establish the legal framework for the granting of police bail, the imposition of
conditions, time limits, and the review process. These provisions strike a balance between the rights of
the suspect and the interests of justice in the pre-charge phase of criminal investigations.
Bail from the Court - Bail Act 1976
Introduction:
Bail is a crucial aspect of the criminal justice system that allows individuals charged with criminal
offenses to be released from custody while awaiting trial. This section explores the provisions related
to bail from the court under the Bail Act 1976.
1. Bail from the Court under the Bail Act 1976:
● The Bail Act 1976 governs the granting of bail by the court in criminal proceedings.
● It sets out the legal framework for considering whether a defendant should be granted bail or
remanded in custody.
2. Types of Bail from the Court:
● The court can grant three types of bail: unconditional bail, conditional bail, and remand in
custody.
3. Unconditional Bail:
● Unconditional bail refers to the release of a defendant without any conditions attached.
● It is typically granted when the court determines that the defendant is not likely to abscond,
interfere with witnesses, or commit further offenses.
4. Conditional Bail:
● Conditional bail is the release of a defendant with specific conditions attached.
● Conditions may include surrendering the defendant's passport, reporting to the police station,
residing at a specified address, or refraining from contacting certain individuals.
● The conditions aim to address concerns about the defendant's behavior or potential risks
associated with their release.
5. Remand in Custody:
● Remand in custody occurs when the court decides that the defendant should be kept in
custody until the trial or further court hearing.
● This decision is made when the court believes there is a risk of the defendant absconding,
interfering with witnesses, committing further offenses, or failing to appear in court.
17
6. Factors Considered by the Court:
● The court considers several factors when deciding whether to grant bail or remand the
defendant in custody.
● These factors include the seriousness of the offense, the defendant's criminal history, the
strength of the evidence, the likelihood of the defendant appearing in court, and the risk of
interference with witnesses or further criminal activity.
7. Review of Bail Conditions:
● The defendant or their legal representative can request a review of the bail conditions imposed
by the court.
● The review is typically conducted by a higher court or a judge.
● If the defendant can demonstrate a change in circumstances or that the conditions are
unjustified or excessive, they may be modified or revoked.
8. Breach of Bail Conditions:
● Breaching the conditions of bail is a serious offense and may result in the defendant being
remanded in custody or facing additional criminal charges.
● It is important for the defendant to comply with the bail conditions to maintain their freedom
pending trial.
Conclusion:
The Bail Act 1976 establishes the legal framework for bail from the court in criminal proceedings.
The court carefully considers the circumstances and factors surrounding the case when deciding
whether to grant bail, impose conditions, or remand the defendant in custody. The act ensures a
balance between the defendant's right to liberty and the interests of justice, with the aim of ensuring
the defendant's appearance in court and maintaining public safety and order.
Factors and Conditions for Bail
Introduction:
Bail plays a crucial role in the criminal justice system by allowing individuals accused of a crime to
be released from custody while awaiting trial. This section examines the factors considered by the
court and the conditions imposed when granting bail.
1. Factors Considered by the Court:
When deciding whether to grant bail, the court takes into account various factors to ensure the
defendant's appearance at trial and the safety of the public. These factors include:
a) Nature and Seriousness of the Offense: The court assesses the nature and seriousness of the
offense. More serious crimes, such as those involving violence or potential harm to others,
may make it less likely for bail to be granted.
b) Strength of the Evidence: The court considers the strength of the evidence against the
defendant. If the evidence is weak or there are doubts about the defendant's guilt, it may
weigh in favor of granting bail.
c) Defendant's Criminal History: The defendant's criminal history is taken into account.
Previous convictions or a history of failing to appear in court may increase the risk of the
defendant not complying with bail conditions or absconding.
d) Risk of Absconding: The court evaluates the likelihood of the defendant absconding,
meaning intentionally failing to appear in court. Factors such as the defendant's ties to the
community, employment, family, and financial circumstances are considered.
e) Risk of Interference with Witnesses or Further Offenses: The court examines whether
there is a risk of the defendant interfering with witnesses or committing further offenses if
18
released on bail. If there is evidence or reasonable suspicion of such risks, bail may be denied
or conditional upon specific conditions.
2. Conditions for Bail:
When granting bail, the court may impose conditions to ensure the defendant's compliance with the
law and to address any concerns regarding public safety. These conditions may include:
a) Reporting to the Police: The defendant may be required to regularly report to a police station
to demonstrate their presence and compliance with bail conditions.
b) Residential Address: The court may require the defendant to reside at a specific address
during the period of bail. This helps to monitor their whereabouts and maintain contact with
the authorities.
c) Surrendering Passports or Travel Restrictions: If there is a risk of the defendant fleeing
the country, the court may order the surrender of passports or impose travel restrictions to
prevent the defendant from leaving the jurisdiction.
d) Curfew Restrictions: The court may impose a curfew, restricting the defendant's movements
during specific hours, to ensure their availability for any court proceedings.
e) Prohibition on Contact: In cases where there is a risk of interference with witnesses or
co-defendants, the court may prohibit the defendant from contacting certain individuals
involved in the case.
f) Surety or Security: In some instances, the court may require the defendant or a third party to
provide a financial guarantee or security as a condition of bail. This acts as an incentive for
the defendant to appear in court.
3. Review and Variation of Bail Conditions:
The defendant or their legal representative can request a review of the bail conditions if circumstances
change or if they believe the conditions are unjust or excessive. The court may then modify or revoke
the conditions if deemed appropriate.
Conclusion:
When granting bail, the court carefully considers various factors to assess the risk of the defendant
failing to appear in court or committing further offenses. Conditions may be imposed to mitigate these
risks and ensure public safety. The factors and conditions for bail aim to strike a balance between the
defendant's right to liberty and the interests of justice, ensuring the proper functioning of the criminal
justice system.
1.2.4 Police Powers
Stop and Search - ss1-1 Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984
(PACE); PACE Code A; Misuse of Drugs Act 1971; Terrorism Act
2000
Introduction:
Stop and search powers are an essential tool available to the police in maintaining public safety and
preventing crime. This section explores the legal framework surrounding stop and search powers,
including relevant legislation and codes of practice.
1. Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE):
19
The primary legislation governing stop and search powers is the Police and Criminal Evidence Act
1984 (PACE). Section 1 of PACE grants the police the power to stop and search individuals under
certain circumstances.
2. PACE Code A:
PACE Code A provides the guidelines and procedures for the exercise of stop and search powers. It
sets out the obligations and responsibilities of the police officers conducting searches and the rights of
individuals being searched.
3. Grounds for Stop and Search:
The police must have reasonable grounds for suspicion before conducting a stop and search. The
grounds can be based on various factors, including:
a) Reasonable suspicion of involvement in criminal activity,
b) Possession of prohibited items,
c) Reasonable belief that a person may be carrying weapons,
d) Reasonable belief that a person may be involved in terrorism-related activities.
4. Misuse of Drugs Act 1971:
Under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, the police have specific stop and search powers related to drug
offenses. They can stop and search individuals if they have reasonable grounds to suspect possession
of controlled substances.
5. Terrorism Act 2000:
The Terrorism Act 2000 provides stop and search powers specifically related to counter-terrorism
efforts. The police can stop and search individuals in designated areas or where there is a reasonable
suspicion of involvement in terrorism-related activities.
6. Powers and Procedures:
When exercising stop and search powers, the police must adhere to certain procedures to ensure
fairness and respect for individuals' rights. These include:
a) Identifying themselves as police officers and providing their warrant card,
b) Providing a clear explanation of the grounds for the search,
c) Conducting the search with sensitivity and respect for the individual's dignity,
d) Recording details of the search, including the officer's name and grounds for suspicion,
e) Providing a copy of the search record to the person searched.
7. Review and Accountability:
There are mechanisms in place to review and hold the police accountable for their use of stop and
search powers. Individuals who believe they have been unfairly targeted or treated during a stop and
search can make a complaint through the appropriate channels.
Conclusion:
Stop and search powers granted to the police under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, along
with other relevant legislation such as the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 and the Terrorism Act 2000, are
crucial for maintaining public safety and preventing crime. However, it is essential that these powers
are exercised lawfully, with respect for individuals' rights and in accordance with the procedures
outlined in PACE Code A. This ensures the balance between effective policing and the protection of
individual liberties.
Arrest - s24 PACE, as amended by Serious Organised Crime and
Police Act 2005; PACE Code G
Introduction:
20
Arrest is a crucial power available to the police in maintaining law and order, preventing crime, and
bringing offenders to justice. This section explores the legal framework surrounding the power of
arrest, including relevant legislation and codes of practice.
1. Section 24 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE), as amended by the Serious
Organised Crime and Police Act 2005:
The power of arrest is primarily governed by Section 24 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act
1984 (PACE). This section outlines the circumstances in which a police officer can lawfully arrest an
individual.
2. PACE Code G:
PACE Code G provides the guidelines and procedures for the exercise of the power of arrest. It sets
out the obligations and responsibilities of the police officers making arrests and the rights of
individuals being arrested.
3. Grounds for Arrest:
In order to make a lawful arrest, the police must have reasonable grounds for suspecting that an
individual has committed, is committing, or is about to commit an offense. The grounds for arrest can
be based on various factors, including:
a) Witness statements or evidence implicating the individual in a crime,
b) Identification of the individual as a suspect based on reliable information,
c) The individual's behavior or actions suggesting their involvement in criminal activity.
4. Arrestable Offences:
An arrest can be made for both arrestable offenses and non-arrestable offenses. Arrestable offenses are
more serious in nature and include offenses such as murder, robbery, and burglary. For non-arrestable
offenses, the police generally have the power to issue a summons or provide a penalty notice rather
than making an arrest.
5. Arrest Procedures:
When making an arrest, the police must adhere to certain procedures to ensure fairness and protect the
rights of the individual. These procedures include:
a) Clearly identifying themselves as police officers,
b) Informing the individual that they are under arrest and providing the grounds for the arrest,
c) Using only necessary and proportionate force when making the arrest,
d) Cautioning the individual, stating the right to remain silent, and explaining the consequences
of not mentioning something they later rely on in court,
e) Recording details of the arrest, including the date, time, location, and reason for the arrest,
f) Advising the individual of their right to legal representation and ensuring they have access to
legal advice.
6. Detention and Custody:
After arrest, the police have the power to detain the individual for questioning and investigation.
Detention must be carried out in accordance with PACE and the relevant codes of practice. The police
must ensure the individual's welfare, provide access to legal representation, and periodically review
the necessity of continued detention.
7. Review and Accountability:
The power of arrest is subject to review and accountability to ensure it is exercised lawfully and fairly.
Individuals who believe they have been unlawfully or unfairly arrested can seek legal remedies, and
there are mechanisms in place to hold the police accountable for their actions.
Conclusion:
The power of arrest granted to the police under Section 24 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act
1984, along with the guidelines provided in PACE Code G, is a fundamental tool in maintaining law
and order. It is essential that this power is exercised lawfully, with respect for individuals' rights, and
21
in accordance with the procedures outlined in PACE and the relevant codes of practice. This ensures
the balance between effective law enforcement and the protection of individual liberties.
Detention of Suspects at Police Stations - time limits (ss34-46
PACE; PACE Code C); rights of the detained person (s56 PACE;
PACE Code C); appropriate adult (PACE Code C); interviews
(s60 and s60A PACE; PACE Code E and F)
Introduction:
When suspects are arrested, they may be taken to a police station for further investigation and
questioning. This section focuses on the legal framework surrounding the detention of suspects at
police stations, including time limits, rights of the detained person, the role of an appropriate adult,
and the rules governing interviews.
1. Time Limits for Detention: Sections 34-46 of PACE and PACE Code C:
a) The duration of detention is regulated by Sections 34-46 of the Police and Criminal Evidence
Act 1984 (PACE) and PACE Code C. These provisions ensure that the police do not detain
individuals for excessive periods without appropriate justification.
b) The initial detention period is generally up to 24 hours, allowing the police to conduct
necessary investigations and make informed decisions about further action.
c) Extensions to the detention period can be authorized by an officer of the rank of
superintendent or above, up to a maximum of 36 hours for certain serious offenses, and in
exceptional circumstances, up to 96 hours with judicial authorization.
2. Rights of the Detained Person: Section 56 of PACE and PACE Code C:
a) Section 56 of PACE and PACE Code C outline the rights of a detained person during their
time at the police station.
b) The detained person must be informed of the reasons for their detention and their right to free
legal advice.
c) They also have the right to inform someone of their arrest and detention, unless it is
reasonably believed that such contact may hinder the investigation or alert others involved in
criminal activity.
3. Role of the Appropriate Adult: PACE Code C:
a) An appropriate adult is a responsible adult who provides support and assistance to vulnerable
detainees, such as juveniles or individuals with mental health issues, during their time at the
police station.
b) PACE Code C stipulates that an appropriate adult should be present during key stages of the
detention process, including interviews, to safeguard the rights and welfare of vulnerable
individuals.
4. Interviews: Sections 60 and 60A of PACE, PACE Code E, and PACE Code F:
a) Interviews play a crucial role in the investigation process, allowing the police to gather
evidence and obtain information from the detained person.
b) Section 60 of PACE permits the police to conduct interviews, which may include questions
about the offense, the detained person's involvement, and their background.
c) PACE Code E provides guidance on the conduct of tape-recorded interviews, including the
use of visual recording equipment.
d) PACE Code F addresses the conduct of interviews for suspects who have been transferred
from one police station to another.
22
Conclusion:
The detention of suspects at police stations involves strict adherence to the legal framework outlined
in the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) and the relevant codes of practice. Time limits
for detention, the rights of the detained person, the presence of an appropriate adult, and the conduct
of interviews are all crucial aspects of this process. These safeguards ensure the fair treatment of
individuals in custody, protect their rights, and contribute to the overall integrity of the criminal
justice system.
Treatment of Suspects at Police Stations - searches (s54 and 55
PACE; PACE Code C); fingerprints (s61 PACE); samples (s62
and s63 PACE); physical conditions of interview room (PACE
Code C); role of the custody officer (PACE Code C)
Introduction:
When suspects are taken to a police station, they are subjected to certain procedures and treatments
that are regulated by the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) and the relevant codes of
practice. This section focuses on the treatment of suspects at police stations, including searches,
fingerprints, samples, physical conditions of interview rooms, and the role of the custody officer.
1. Searches: Sections 54 and 55 of PACE and PACE Code C:
a) Section 54 of PACE and PACE Code C authorize the police to conduct searches of suspects
and their possessions upon arrival at the police station.
b) The purpose of the search is to find and remove any items that could be used to harm the
detainee, damage property, or aid in escape.
c) PACE Code C provides guidelines on the conduct of searches, ensuring they are carried out
fairly, with respect for the detainee's dignity and privacy.
2. Fingerprints: Section 61 of PACE:
a) Section 61 of PACE grants the police the power to take fingerprints and palm prints of
suspects at the police station.
b) The purpose of taking fingerprints is to establish the identity of the suspect and compare them
with existing records on the police database.
3. Samples: Sections 62 and 63 of PACE:
a) Sections 62 and 63 of PACE allow the police to take samples, such as DNA, hair, saliva, or
bodily fluids, from suspects at the police station.
b) Samples are collected to assist in the investigation and provide evidence in criminal
proceedings.
4. Physical Conditions of Interview Rooms: PACE Code C:
a) PACE Code C sets out the standards for the physical conditions of interview rooms at police
stations.
b) The code ensures that interview rooms are suitable for conducting interviews, with adequate
lighting, seating arrangements, and recording equipment.
c) The physical conditions should be conducive to fair and effective communication between the
suspect and the interviewing officer.
5. Role of the Custody Officer: PACE Code C:
a) The custody officer is responsible for the overall management and welfare of detainees at the
police station.
23
b) PACE Code C provides guidance on the role of the custody officer, including their
responsibilities in relation to the treatment of suspects, authorising detention, and ensuring
compliance with legal requirements.
Conclusion:
The treatment of suspects at police stations is governed by the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984
(PACE) and the relevant codes of practice. Searches, fingerprinting, sampling, physical conditions of
interview rooms, and the role of the custody officer are all important aspects of this process. These
regulations aim to strike a balance between the effective investigation of crime and the protection of
suspects' rights and dignity. By ensuring that procedures are carried out in accordance with the law,
the criminal justice system maintains its integrity and safeguards the rights of individuals in police
custody.
Impact of the Breach of these rules - statement obtained through
oppression (s76 PACE); exclusion of evidence (s78 PACE)
Introduction:
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) and its associated codes of practice govern the
exercise of police powers when dealing with suspects. These rules are crucial to ensure that the
investigation process is fair and that the rights of individuals in police custody are protected. When
these rules are breached, the consequences can be significant, leading to the exclusion of evidence and
the possibility of statements being obtained through oppression.
1. Statement Obtained through Oppression: Section 76 of PACE:
a) Section 76 of PACE deals with the admissibility of statements obtained through oppression.
b) Oppression refers to any form of mistreatment, physical or psychological, used by police
officers to extract statements from suspects.
c) If a court finds that a statement was obtained through oppression, it is not admissible as
evidence against the suspect.
2. Exclusion of Evidence: Section 78 of PACE:
a) Section 78 of PACE provides the court with the discretionary power to exclude any evidence
that has been improperly obtained or would make the proceedings unfair.
b) The court will assess whether the admission of such evidence would adversely affect the
fairness of the trial or bring the administration of justice into disrepute.
c) If evidence is deemed to be obtained unlawfully, the court has the authority to exclude it from
being presented during the trial.
3. Rationale for Exclusion and Impact on the Criminal Justice System:
a) The rationale behind excluding evidence obtained through oppression or in breach of police
powers rules is to uphold the principles of fairness and justice in criminal proceedings.
b) By excluding unlawfully obtained evidence, the court aims to deter police misconduct and
prevent abuse of power during investigations.
c) The exclusionary rule acts as a safeguard to ensure that suspects' rights are respected,
enhancing public confidence in the criminal justice system.
4. Judicial Discretion and Balancing Interests:
a) Section 78 gives the court discretion to determine whether the admission of unlawfully
obtained evidence would be unfair or prejudicial.
b) The court will weigh the interests of justice, the seriousness of the breach, and the impact on
the trial's fairness before deciding whether to exclude the evidence.
5. Case Examples:
24
a) R v Khan (1997): In this case, the Court of Appeal ruled that a statement obtained through
oppressive conduct by the police should be excluded from evidence at trial.
b) R v Hanson and Others (2005): The court excluded evidence improperly obtained during a
police operation, leading to the defendants' acquittal due to lack of admissible evidence.
Conclusion:
The breach of police powers rules, such as obtaining statements through oppression or unlawfully, can
have severe consequences for the admissibility of evidence in criminal proceedings. Section 76 of
PACE renders statements obtained through oppression inadmissible, protecting suspects' rights.
Additionally, Section 78 gives the court the discretionary power to exclude unlawfully obtained
evidence, ensuring that the trial remains fair and upholds the integrity of the criminal justice system.
These measures act as vital checks and balances against police misconduct and ensure that justice is
served in criminal cases.