R v Hendon Justices, ex parte DPP

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Year1993
Date1993
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
12 cases
  • R (Wirral Health Authority and Another) v Mental Health Review Tribunal and Another
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
    • 13 Noviembre 2001
    ...13. A number of cases in which this principle has been applied were considered by the Divisional Court in R v Hendon Justices ex p DPP [1994] QB 167, 175ff. Scott Baker J considered this decision at paras 59 to 63 of his judgment in the present case and relied on it to reach the conclusion ......
  • DPP v Tonie Jarman
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
    • 10 Diciembre 2013
    ...that the decision of the lay magistrates was unreasonable and was a nullity. The prosecution referred to R v Hendon Justices (ex parte Director of Public Prosecutions) [1993] 96 Cr App R 227, in which, on the particular facts of that case, this court found that the magistrates had acted out......
  • R (Wirral Health Authority and Another) v Mental Health Review Tribunal and Another
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 26 Noviembre 2001
    ...of natural justice. 13A number of cases in which this principle has been applied were considered by the Divisional Court in R v Hendon Justices ex parte DPP [1994] QB 167, 175 and following. Scott Baker J considered this decision at paragraphs 59 to 63 of his judgment in the present case a......
  • R v Horseferry Road Magistrates' Court and Another
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
    • 10 Marzo 1995
    ...Ex parte Director of Public Prosecutions [1992] 95 Cr.App.R. 180 and R v Hendon Justices, Ex parte Director of Public Prosecutions [1994] QB 167. In such cases the decision has been held to be a nullity so that judicial review is an appropriate process. 24 In the present case, Mr McGuinness......
  • 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