R v John Martin Kirby

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
JudgeLord Justice Singh
Judgment Date21 February 2019
Neutral Citation[2019] EWCA Crim 321
Docket NumberNo: 201602805/B2-201603536/B2
CourtCourt of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Date21 February 2019

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • R (on the application of Majera (formerly SM (Rwanda)) (AP) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
    • United Kingdom
    • Supreme Court
    • 20 October 2021
    ...of defence to criminal proceedings for their breach, were not permitted in Director of Public Prosecutions v T (para 47 above) and R v Kirby (John Martin) (para 55 58 Even if the defence had been relevant, however, the procedure adopted raises a number of questions. One way of dealing with ......
  • Between: (1) Arnage Holdings Ltd (2) Brooklands Holdings Ltd (3) East Farthing Holdings Ltd (4) Ms Katia Rabello (5) Mr Fernando Toledo Plaintiffs v Walkers (A Firm) Defendant
    • Cayman Islands
    • Grand Court (Cayman Islands)
    • 25 January 2022
    ...jurisdiction to make the order …” 94 Lord Reed at paragraph 55 referred to the reference by Singh LJ in R v. Kirby (John Martin) [2019] EWCA Crim 321 at paragraph 13 to “a long-standing principle of our law that there is an obligation to obey an apparently valid order of a court unless and......
  • Arnage Holdings Ltd v Walkers (A Firm)
    • Cayman Islands
    • Grand Court (Cayman Islands)
    • 25 January 2022
    ...jurisdiction to make the order …” 94 Lord Reed at paragraph 55 referred to the reference by Singh LJ in R v. Kirby (John Martin) [2019] EWCA Crim 321 at paragraph 13 to “a long-standing principle of our law that there is an obligation to obey an apparently valid order of a court unless and......
  • R v Roman Wilkes (Aka Martin Easton)
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 9 February 2022
    ...The consideration of issues of this kind has arisen previously, in particular in the recent decision of this Court in R v Kirby [2019] EWCA Crim 321. That case concerned a non-molestation order which had been erroneously granted by the High Court and which had then formed the basis of proc......
  • 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