Alistair Brogan v Nottingham Crown Court
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Mr Justice Julian Knowles |
| Judgment Date | 13 October 2020 |
| Neutral Citation | [2020] EWHC 2646 (Admin) |
| Docket Number | Case No: CO/427/2020 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court) |
| Date | 13 October 2020 |
[2020] EWHC 2646 (Admin)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
Sitting as at Leeds Combined Court Centre
1 Oxford Row
Leeds LS1 3BG
Mr Justice Julian Knowles
Case No: CO/427/2020
and
The Claimant appeared in person
The other parties did not appear and were not represented
Hearing date: 6 October 2020
Approved Judgment
The Honourable Mr Justice Julian Knowles
This is a renewed application for permission to seek judicial review following refusal on the papers by Steyn J. The Claimant, Alistair Brogan, seeks to challenge the dismissal of his appeal at Nottingham Crown Court (Mr Recorder King and justices) on 20 July 2018 against his conviction at Mansfield Magistrates Court on 5 April 2018 for the offence of failing to supply information regarding a driver's identity as required, contrary to s 172(3) of the Road Traffic Act 1988. He was fined and ordered to pay costs and the victim surcharge, and his licence was endorsed with six penalty points.
The Defendant Crown Court is neutral as to the application (as is normal). The Chief Constable, whilst not formally identified as an Interested Party on the Claim Form, was in fact served with the papers and has filed an Acknowledgement of Service resisting the application for permission. He argues the application is out of time and that in any event the appropriate method of challenging the dismissal of the appeal should have been by way of an application for a case to be stated for the opinion of the High Court.
I held a remote hearing on 6 October 2020. Mr Brogan addressed me in person, having filed extensive documentation and written submissions. Neither the Defendant nor the Interested Party appeared. I reserved my decision, indicating that I would put it in writing. This I now do.
Factual background
On 28/7/17 a car of which the Claimant's wife was the registered keeper was photographed by a speed camera on the A638 Great North Road, Ranskill, Nottinghamshire, travelling at excess speed.
According to a witness statement from Alix Walker, a file submission officer with Nottingham Safety Camera Partnership employed by Nottinghamshire Police, on 4/8/17 a combined notice of intended prosecution/s 172 notice was sent to Mrs Brogan by first class post. This required Mrs Brogan, if she was not the driver, to tell the police who the driver was. The Claimant maintains that this was never received and that it was not until a reminder was sent on or about 4 September 2017, and received by his wife a few days later, that they became aware of the matter.
There then followed lengthy correspondence between both Mr and Mrs Brogan and the Nottingham Safety Camera Partnership. Neither of them admitted to being the driver and neither of them said who the driver was. On 19 September 2017 Mrs Brogan said she definitely was not driving and that her husband might be able to assist. A s 172 form was then sent to the Claimant on or about 22 September 2022. The Claimant wrote in response saying that because of the passage of time he was unsure who was driving and that it might have been ‘an associate’.
Further correspondence ensued which it is not necessary to detail. In due course the Claimant and his wife were both summonsed for the s 172(3) offence of failing to supply information. Contrary to assertions in the Claimant's written submissions, they were not prosecuted for driving at excess speed. Mrs Brogan was acquitted by the magistrates but, as I have said, the Claimant was convicted.
The Claimant then appealed to Nottingham Crown Court, but his appeal was dismissed, as I have said.
The Claimant then attempted to appeal to the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) and lodged the relevant NG form with the Crown Court. Of course, the Court of Appeal only has jurisdiction in relation to trials on indictment and so had no jurisdiction in relation to the Claimant's case. The only remedies open to the Claimant were to apply to the Crown Court for it to state a case for the opinion of the High Court or (in theory at least, a matter to which I shall return) to apply for permission to seek judicial review.
However, and this was most unfortunate, in July 2018 an email was sent to the Claimant by an official at Nottingham Crown Court saying, ‘I have been directed by His Honour Judge Rafferty QC to forward your request for a further appeal to the Court of Appeal’. This created the impression in the mind of the Claimant that he had been given permission to appeal; of course, whatever the learned judge directed, it could not have been that, because he had no power to grant permission to appeal. The Claimant also sent an appeal form to the Court of Appeal on or about 9 August 2018.
There then followed over a year of correspondence between variously, the Claimant, the Crown Court, and the Administrative Court Office (ACO). There was correspondence about transcripts and whether these would be at public expense. The Claimant's application for a fee waiver for transcripts was eventually refused.
On 30 September 2019 the Claimant emailed the ACO enquiring about the progress of his appeal and maintaining that His Honour Judge Rafferty QC had granted permission. The ACO replied on 2 October 2019 saying they had no record of the case.
The Claimant then complained to Nottingham Crown Court. A response from a court official on 17 October 2019 explained that the form which was sent to the Court of Appeal on the judge's direction in July 2018 had been returned the same day by the Criminal Appeal Office because the Court of Appeal had no jurisdiction. The Crown Court said it had then sent the form to the ACO. Also, and importantly, this letter clearly informed the Claimant that any appeal would have to be to the Administrative Court.
After a further letter of complaint, the Claimant received a response on 21 October 2019 from the Operations Manager at Nottingham Crown Court again informing him clearly that any appeal would have to be to the Administrative Court. There is also among the papers...
To continue reading
Request your trial