R v Errington
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Date | 1922 |
| Year | 1922 |
| Court | Court of Criminal Appeal |
-
- 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
4 cases
-
R v Johal
...at any stage of a trial: there is nothing in it precluding amendment after arraignment. 10 In the two earliest cases cited by Mr. Farrer, Errington (16 C.A.R. 148) and Jennings (33 C.A.R. 148) amendments were held to have been wrongly allowed on the ground that the accused would be prejudic......
-
People (Attorney General) v Shribman and Samuels
...1 K. B. 773, at p. 797. (5) [1908] 2 K. B. 385, at p. 403. (1) (1729) Mosely 112. (2) 46 I. L. T. R. 239. (1) 28 Cox, C. C. 336. (2) 16 Cr. App. R. 148. (3) [1941] I. R. 406. (4) 18 Cr. App. R. 175. (5) 23 Cr. App. R. 145. (6) [1945] P. 15, at p. 20. (7) 6 Cox, C. C. 525. (1) [1916] 2 K. B.......
-
Lewis v R
...nor, if the trial has started, have been put in charge of the jury on it; and if it were made, injustice, as the case of Errington (1922) 16 Cr. App. R. 148 and Hughes (1927) 20 Cr. App. R. 4 show, would almost certainly be caused.” The Court”s reluctance to allow, at a late stage in the tr......
-
The Queen v Mak Chi Kin And Others
...to it nor, if the trial has started, have been put in charge of the jury on it; and if it were made, injustice as R. v. Errington (1922) 16 Cr. App. R 148 and R. v. Hughes (1927) 20 Cr. App. R 4 show would almost certainly be caused. When, however, the Court which is asked before arraignmen......