R v Arnold (Louise) ; R v LSA
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Court | Courts-Martial Appeal Court |
| Judgment Date | 16 May 2008 |
| Date | 16 May 2008 |
Courts-Martial Appeal Court
Before Lord Justice Hughes, Mr Justice Treacy and Sir Peter Cresswell
Regina
and
Arnold
No jurisdiction to hear appeal
The Courts-Martial Appeal Court had no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal by a prosecutor unless at, or before informing the court that it intended to appeal the prosecutor had agreed that the accused should be acquitted of the charge if leave to appeal was not obtained.
The Courts-Martial Appeal Court so held when refusing an application by the Royal Air Force Prosecuting...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 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 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 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 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 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 Free Trial
11 cases
-
R v T(N)
...none of these decisions need to be referred to in the context of the legislation relating to acquittal agreements. 18 The reasoning in R v LSA, a Court Martial case, brought under the provisions of military law which are identical to ss 58–61 of the 2003 Act is compelling. Omitting the refe......
-
R v Layden
...Authority (1998) 194 CLR 355 R v Al-Jaryan (Muner) [2020] EWCA Crim 1801; [2021] 1 Cr App R 25, CA R v Arnold [2008] EWCA Crim 1034; [2008] 1 WLR 2881; [2009] 1 All ER 1103; [2008] 2 Cr App R 37, Ct MAC R v Ashton [2006] EWCA Crim 794; [2007] 1 WLR 181; [2006] 2 Cr App R 15, CA R v C (Prose......
-
R v SA and Others
...(ss. 57–74) relating to “Prosecution Appeals”, amounted to a fundamental change in criminal law. In R v Arnold [2008] EWCA Crim 1034; [2008] 2 Cr App R 37, at [26], Hughes LJ (as he then was) explained this change: “The Crown is given a right of appeal in relation to trial on indictment fo......
-
R v Joseph Karumba Wangige
...judge in Phipps which the Court of Appeal had rejected. No doubt it can be said, as Hughes LJ said in Arnold [2008] EWCA Crim 1034, [2008] 2 Cr. App. R 37 at paragraph 37, that there can be a difference between two charges founded on the same facts and two charges sharing some facts in co......
Get Started for Free
1 books & journal articles
-
When Might Two Offences be Founded on the Same Course of Conduct?
...charging and pursuing both offences.As Bennathan J noted in Hamer, the decision in Hartnett was subsequently approved in R v Arnold[2008] 2 Cr App R 37. In that case, in what were obiter remarks, Hughes LJ observed:‘… sometimes the presentation of different charges in the same court, arisin......