Nankissoon Boodram v Attorney-General and Another
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judgment Date | 1994 |
| Year | 1994 |
| Date | 1994 |
| Court | Privy Council |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 7-day Trial
12 cases
-
Shamari Hodge Terrence Richardson Vaughn Brodie Claimants v Commissioner of Police Defendant [ECSC]
...either way the accused must consent(my emphasis) to being tried summarily. This principle is clearly borne out in the cases of Boodram-v-The Attorney General1, R-v-Craske, ex parte Metropolitan Police Commissioner2 and R-v-Birmingham Justices, ex parte Hodgson3 Further, the learning in Blac......
-
Hyles v Director of Public Prosecutions; Williams v Director of Public Prosecutions
...R v. Kray (1969) 53 Cr App R 412; Murphy v. The Queen [1989] HCA 28.; Grant v. DPP (1980) 30 W.I.R. 246; Nankissoon Boodram v. AG (1994) 47 W.I.R. 459.] Nevertheless, the Court found that the trial judge made some errors in conducting the exercise, including failing to record a ruling or......
-
Andre Penn Claimant v 1. The Director of Public Prosecutions of the Virgin Islands 2. The Attorney General Defendants
...on 8 th July 2013. 10R v Kray (1969) 53 Cr. App. R. 412 11R v Kray at pages 414 –415 12 Grant v DPP (1981)30 WIR 246 ; Nankisson Boodram v Attorney General and Another, (1994) 47 WIR 459 [2013] ECSC J0725-1 EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (CIVIL) CLAIM NO. 166B......
-
Andre Penn Claimant v 1. The Director of Public Prosecutions of the Virgin Islands 2. The Attorney General Defendants
...on 8 th July 2013. 10R v Kray (1969) 53 Cr. App. R. 412 11R v Kray at pages 414 –415 12 Grant v DPP (1981)30 WIR 246 ; Nankisson Boodram v Attorney General and Another, (1994) 47 WIR 459 [2013] ECSC J0725-2 EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (CIVIL) CLAIM NO. 16......
Get Started for Free
1 books & journal articles
-
Privy Council
...a robust attitude toward claims of preju-dice arising from media reporting: see, for example, Boodram, especiallyin the Court of Appeal (1994) 47 WIR 459 and, in the domestic context,R vKray (1969) 53 Cr App R 412 and R vWest [1996] 2 Cr App R 374;though the distinctions drawn in Attorney-G......