R (on the application of SY (BY HER LITIGATION FRIEND SP)) (Claimant) v DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS (Defendant) & AHMED BAIG (Interested Party) (2018)

A prosecutor’s decision not to charge a man with the rape of a woman with learning difficulties was not irrational. The circumstances of the man’s acquittal some years earlier on charges of sexual activity with a person with a mental disorder impeding choice were such that the prosecutor had been right to conclude that the […]

Read More

R v H (2014)

An acquittal on counts of rape and assault by penetration would be quashed and a retrial ordered where the complainant had left the country after giving an achieving best evidence interview and the Crown had offered no evidence at trial. There was new and compelling evidence in the form of the complainant’s evidence which was […]

Read More

R v (1) DZ (2) JZ (2012)

The judge had been wrong to direct the acquittal of two of the four defendants in a case involving an allegation of the sexual abuse of a 13-year-old girl; evidence of collusion between the complainant and a witness might be used to cast doubt on their reliability and truthfulness but it should not have been […]

Read More

R V TW (2004)

In a trial in respect of a number of sexual offences, an application to cross-examine the complainant about what she had said in the past concerning her previous relationships with men was rightly rejected as being contrary to the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 s.41 . There was nothing inconsistent with guilty verdicts […]

Read More