R v Criminal Cases Review Commission, ex parte Pearson

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Date1999
Year1999
CourtQueen's Bench Division
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex
109 cases
  • R v Erskine; R v Williams
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • July 14, 2009
    ...conclusion was that “in the last analysis as appears from all these decisions each case turned on its own facts”. 51 R v Criminal Cases Review Commission ex parte Pearson [2000] 1 Cr App R 141, involved an application for judicial review of a decision by the Criminal Cases Review Commission......
  • Daniel v The State
    • United Kingdom
    • Privy Council
    • May 23, 2012
    ...before the trial jury a defence known to be available": R v Erskine and Williams [2010] 1 WLR 183 at para 90, quoting R v Criminal Cases Review Commission, Ex p Pearson [1993] 3 All ER 498, 517. Mr Knox submits that the decision not to run diminished responsibility was taken for tactical r......
  • R (Edwards) v Criminal Cases Review Commission
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
    • October 13, 2008
    ...test to be applied by the court in present circumstances was stated by Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Chief Justice, in R v Criminal Cases Review Commission, Ex parte Pearson [1999] 3 All E.R. 498, at page 521: “The real test must be to ask whether the reasons given by the Commission betray, to ......
  • R v Dallas (Glenn Kenneth)
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • July 8, 2010
    ...lurking doubt, or uneasiness, as to whether an injustice has been done as mentioned by Lord Bingham (when Lord Chief Justice) in R v CCRC ex parte Pearson [1999] 3 All ER 498 at page 503 applies to this case. 26 For the reasons we have sought to give, we are perfectly satisfied that the app......
  • Get Started for Free
11 books & journal articles
  • Table of Cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Forensic Investigations and Miscarriages of Justice. The Rhetoric Meets The Reality Part Three
    • June 15, 2010
    ...Causley, [2003] EWCA Crim 1840 ............................................................. 85, 88– 89 R. v. CCRC ex parte Pearson, [1999] 3 All E.R. 498 ...................................................... 333 R. v. Clark (No. 2), [2003] EWCA Crim 1020 .........................45, 46–47......
  • Women Who Kill Abusive Men: The Limitations of Loss of Control, Provocation and Self-Defence in England and Wales and Canada
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage Journal of Criminal Law, The No. 87-2, April 2023
    • April 1, 2023
    ...failed and a conviction for murder followed. R v Hobson [1998] 1 CrApp Rep 31. R v Criminal Cases Review Commission, ex parte Pearson [1999] 3 All ER 498. R v Anderson [2000] LexisCitation 4342. R v Keaveney [2004] EWCA Crim 1091. R v Carson [2004] NICC 5. R v Cole [2005] EWCA Crim 1335.R v......
  • Women Who Kill Abusive Men: The Limitations of Loss of Control, Provocation and Self-Defence in England and Wales and Canada
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage Journal of Criminal Law, The No. 87-2, April 2023
    • April 1, 2023
    ...failed and a conviction for murder followed. R v Hobson [1998] 1 CrApp Rep 31. R v Criminal Cases Review Commission, ex parte Pearson [1999] 3 All ER 498. R v Anderson [2000] LexisCitation 4342. R v Keaveney [2004] EWCA Crim 1091. R v Carson [2004] NICC 5. R v Cole [2005] EWCA Crim 1335.R v......
  • The Right to Appeal and Workable Systems of Justice
    • United Kingdom
    • Wiley The Modern Law Review No. 65-5, September 2002
    • September 1, 2002
    ...a person who isdead (RvMaguire [1992] QB 936).45 See the judgment of Lord Bingham CJ in RvCriminal Cases Review Commission Ex p Pearson(1999) 3 All ER 498.46 Although the figures vary from year to year, it would be fair to say that on average one third of leaveapplications for conviction ap......
  • Get Started for Free

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