R (Holme) v Liverpool Magistrates Court

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Neutral Citation[2004] EWHC 3131 (Admin)
Year2004
Date2004
CourtQueen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
5 cases
  • Nkromah v Willesden Magistrates' Court
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
    • 17 December 2013
    ...Zykin v Crown Prosecution Service [2009] EWHC 1469 Admin), but only to rectify a mistake or something akin to a mistake, R v Holme [2004] EWHC 3131 Admin) …" 12 She also referred to the statement of Laws LJ in R (M) Manorgale Ltd and Thames Magistrates [2013] EWHC 535 (Admin) at 8 that: "Th......
  • R Simon Williamson v City of Westminster Magistrates' Court Crown Prosecution Service (Interested Parties) Rhys Mardon
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
    • 29 May 2012
    ...Court which he cannot pursue because he has unequivocally pleaded guilty." (pages 416 -417) 34 R (Holme) v. Liverpool City Justices [2004] EWHC 3131 (Admin) was a case in which the Magistrates acceded to an application to revisit a sentence seven months after a conviction on the basis that ......
  • Trigger (R) v Northampton Magistrates Court
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
    • 2 February 2011
    ...imposing an immediate sentence of imprisonment. The claimant relies on the judgment of this Court in Holme v Liverpool City Justices [2004] EWHC 3131 (Admin). 21 Mr Knight, who appeared on behalf of the claimant, submitted that the magistrates could not use section 142 to resentence the cla......
  • Zykin v Crown Prosecution Service
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
    • 14 May 2009
    ...reasons, I declined to re-open the adjudication of 9th September.” 12 In Holme v Liverpool City Justices & Crown Prosecution Service [2004] EWHC 3131 (Admin), this court considered the proper interpretation of section 142(1) of the 1980 Act. The section itself is expressed in very broad ter......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT