Re Glenn's Application for JR
| Jurisdiction | Northern Ireland |
| Judge | Weatherup J |
| Judgment Date | 2002 |
| Neutral Citation | [2002] NIQB 61 |
| Date | 08 November 2002 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Northern Ireland) |
1
Neutral Citation No. [2002] NIQB 61 Ref:
WEAB3237
Judgment: approved by the Court for handing down Delivered:
8/11/2002
(subject to editorial corrections)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN NORTHERN IRELAND
QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION (JUDICIAL REVIEW)
------
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY BRIAN GLENN BY HIS MOTHER
AND NEXT FRIEND MARGARET GLENN FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW OF A
DECISION BY NORTH ANTRIM MAGISTRATES’ COURT
------
WEATHERUP J
[1] The applicant applies for judicial review of a decision of the Resident
Magistrate sitting at North Antrim Magistrates’ Court on 23 January 2002
refusing to stay proceedings against the applicant as an abuse of process by
reason of the loss of evidence by the police.
[2] The applicant faces three complaints of assault and one complaint of theft
arising out of events occurring at a petrol filling station at Bushmills Road,
Portrush, County Antrim on 22 January 2001. The complaint of theft was alleged
to have occurred inside the filling station and the complaints of assault
concerned the filling station owner, his daughter and an employee who were all
involved with the applicant on the forecourt of the filling station and inside the
filling station. A closed circuit television camera recorded events occurring on
the forecourt of the filling station and the investigating police officer was
provided with a videotape of the events occurring on the forecourt.
[3] On the day of the incident the police officer viewed one minute of the
videotape which showed a part of the incident on the forecourt of the filling
station involving the applicant. He stated on affidavit that the evidential value of
the video was minimal as the CCTV was located some twenty to twenty-five feet
from the incident and all that could be observed was a struggle involving the
filling station staff and the applicant. The police officer did not view the start of
the incident and could not report who had started the struggle or how it had
started nor at a range of twenty to twenty-five feet could he report who was
doing what to whom as he described the view on the videotape as being just a
general struggle.
To continue reading
Request your trial
2 cases
-
Queen v Jones (Gary) Ruling No 3: Abuse of Process
...34 [62] There are two relevant decisions of the Canadian Supreme Court in this sphere. These were considered in Re Glenn’s Application [2002] NIQB 61, where, referring to the first, R –v- Carosella [1997] 1 SCR 80, Weatherup J observed: “However it is apparent from the majority judgment in ......
-
Queen v Canning (Marvin)
...[112] There are two relevant decisions of the Canadian Supreme Court in this sphere. These were considered in Re Glenn’s Application [2002] NIQB 61, where, referring to the first, R –v- Carosella [1997] 1 SCR 80, Weatherup J observed: “However it is apparent from the majority judgment in R ......