R v Phillips; R v Quayle

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeal
Date1938
Year1938

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex
27 cases
  • R v Maharaj; and other appeals
    • Trinidad & Tobago
    • Court of Appeal (Trinidad and Tobago)
    • Invalid date
  • Neill v North Antrim Magistrates' Court and Another
    • United Kingdom
    • House of Lords
    • 12 November 1992
    ... ... The situation is far removed from that which existed in case such as Gee, Bibby and Dunscombe [1936] 2 K.B. 442 , Phillips a nd Quayle [1939] 1 K.B. 63 and Wharmby, Lindley and Lindley (1946) 31 Cr. App. Rep. 174 , where the departure from the requirements of the ... ...
  • R v Ali Bahbahani
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 5 February 2018
    ...examined by Robin Cooke in his article, between pages 104 and 105. The cases he examined include R v Gee [1936] 2 KB 442 and R v Phillips [1939] 1 KB 63. But the point is that where the committal for trial on indictment was invalidated by a fundamental flaw, it followed that the bill of ind......
  • Tiwari v State of Trinidad and Tobago
    • United Kingdom
    • Privy Council
    • 29 May 2002
    ...necessarily be fatal to the committal. The situation is far removed from that which existed in cases such as Rex v Gee [1936] 2 KB 442; Rex v Phillips [1939] 1 KB 63 and Rex v Wharmby (1946) 31 Cr App R 174, where the departure from the requirements of the Indictable Offences Act 1848 (1......
  • Get Started for Free
1 books & journal articles
  • Committal Proceedings
    • Jamaica
    • Criminal practice and procedure in the Magistrates' Courts in the Commonwealth Caribbean
    • 18 June 2010
    ...rule is that the committal proceedings should be held in the presence of the accused. This point was decided in R v Phillips and Quayle [1939] 1 K.B. 63 in which the Court held that where evidence is taken in the absence of the accused, the committal proceedings will be invalid. In Antigua ......