Crawley & Ors, R. v
2014
COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)
United Kingdom
CORAM
- LORD JUSTICE TREACY
Areas of Law
- Criminal Law and Procedure
- Human Rights Law
2014
COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)
United Kingdom
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The prosecution's appeal was against Judge Leonard's decision to stay a complex FCA-initiated criminal trial due to the unavailability of legal representation for the defendants. The lack of counsel stemmed from fee disputes following legal aid reforms. The appellate court reversed the lower court’s decision, indicating that the trial could proceed with an adjournment. It emphasized the high threshold for staying proceedings to protect the integrity of the criminal justice system and noted errors in the lower court's reasoning that linked the FCA and MoJ responsibilities. The appellate court highlighted that Article 6 of the ECHR does not guarantee the right to specific counsel under legal aid.
Judgment
Sir Brian Leveson P :
This is an application by the prosecution for leave to appeal a decision dated 1 May 2014 of His Honour Judge Leonard Q.C. sitting in the Crown Court at Southwark in which he stayed a prosecution initiated by the Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”) in relation to a trial which had been due to commence with a jury on 6 May. Notice of intention to appeal pursuant to s. 58 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 was given within the period allowed by the judge and it was acknowledged that the respondents would be entitled to be acquitted should leave not be obtained or the appeal abandoned. It has been referred to the full court by the Registrar on the basis that if leave is granted, the appeal will follow. We do grant leave.
The background to the indictment has been identified by the judge in the following succinct way (which we gratefully adopt):
“1. The [respondents] are charged with offences of conspiracy to defraud, possessing criminal property and offences contrary to s.19 and 23(1), and s.177(4)(a) of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. The evidence is complex and substantial. The volume of papers amounts to some 46,030 pages. There are in addition 194 excel spreadsheets with a combined total of 864,200 lines of entry. The Case Summary covers 55 pages.
2. In essence the Crown alleges that between 2008 and 2011 the defendants were involved in a land banking scheme using, variously, three limited companies. Those companies acquired, or purported to acquire, sites which were then divided into a number of sub-plots. It is alleged that those sub-plots were then aggressively marketed to members of the public – often vulnerable members of the public – who were persuaded to buy based on false representations as to the nature of the company selling the sub-plots, the professionals they employed, as to planning permission, potential purchasers of the sites for onward development and their previous success. Some purchasers were given good title, some were not, and some sub-plots were sold more than once. Various interventions by the FSA (as it then was) to stop the practices were subverted by transferring the fraudulent scheme to a new company. ”
The investigation and prosecution have been in the hands of the FCA and it is clearly an extremely important but complex case. Following arrests in November 2011, the respondents (and three others) were subsequently charged in April 2013 with the offences. Having been transferred