R v Cockley
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | MR. JUSTICE BRISTOW |
| Judgment Date | 16 March 1984 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [1984] EWCA Crim J0316-1 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) |
| Docket Number | No. 774/B/84 |
| Date | 16 March 1984 |
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
5 cases
-
R v Smith (Patrick Joseph) ; R v Taylor (James) ; R v Nicholson (John) ; R v Johnson (Henry)
...after the wrongful rejection of a submission of no case to answer. Formerly the position was judged at the time of the submission (see R v—Cockley 79 CAR 181CA). In R -v—Berry 99 CLR 487 (transcript 20th January 1998) this court seems to have considered that the approach remains unchanged f......
-
R v Ilhan Doldur
...defendant was wrongly exposed to conviction on the strength of his co-defendant's evidence alone. There are obiter dicta of the Court in R v. Cockley (1984) 79 Cr. App. R 181, CA, at 183–4 following Abbott in drawing the same distinction. 35 It may be that, where the only evidence against a......
-
R v Philip Lyons
...has power under section 16 of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 to award costs as the court sees fit. LORD JUSTICE PARKERR v. Cockley [1984] 79 Cr App R 181, and R v. Faulkner 56 Cr App R 594. 5 We do not find those cases of any real assistance. Although the essence of the case is stated......
-
The Queen v Chiu Yuk Ching And Another
...comment that "judges in doubt on this point will be well advised to direct a second arraignment." (1) [1976] 3 All E.R. 549 (2) [1984] 79 Cr.App.R. 181 (3) [1972] 56 Cr.App.R. 348 (4) [1974] 58 Cr.App.R. 394 (C.A.) Representation: Ming Huang, Esq. assigned by DLA for both applicants. M. Jen......
Get Started for Free