Andrew Osarinmwian, R (on the application of) v Manchester Crown Court
[2024] EWHC 76 (Admin)
Darykie Ramos Molina, R (on the application of) v Crown Court at Snaresbrook
12 April 2024
[2024] EWHC 816 (Admin)
High Court
The police arrested someone, and a court let them go on bail. The prosecution tried to appeal this but messed up the paperwork. Even though they messed up, a higher court still heard the case and sent the person back to jail. A judge ruled that the higher court shouldn't have done that because of the paperwork mistake, and they should not have interfered with the first court's decision.
Key Facts
- •Darykie Ramos Molina (claimant) was granted bail by Barkingside Magistrates' Court after being charged with four offences.
- •The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) orally indicated an intention to appeal the bail grant but failed to serve written notice within the required two-hour timeframe.
- •The Magistrates' Court disposed of the appeal due to the CPS's procedural failure.
- •Despite the disposal, the case was inexplicably transferred to Snaresbrook Crown Court, where the judge remanded the claimant in custody.
- •The claimant sought judicial review of the Crown Court's decision.
Legal Principles
The Bail (Amendment) Act 1993 sets out mandatory procedures for appealing bail decisions, including oral and written notice requirements.
Bail (Amendment) Act 1993, section 1
Strict compliance with the 1993 Act's procedures is necessary, particularly regarding the liberty of the subject. While minor procedural errors may not always invalidate an appeal, the scope for flexibility is narrow and the prosecution must demonstrate due diligence and absence of prejudice to the defendant.
Middlesex Guildhall Crown Court, Ex p. Okoli [2000] 1 Cr. App. R. 1; R v Isleworth Crown Court Ex p Clarke [1998] 1 Cr App R 257; R (on the application of Jeffrey) v Warwick Crown Court [2002] EWHC 2469 (Admin); R (Cardin) v Birmingham Crown Court and Birmingham Magistrates’ Court [2017] EWHC 2101 (Admin); Hammond v Governor of HMP Winchester [2024] EWHC 91 (Admin)
The Crown Court has no inherent jurisdiction to overturn Magistrates' Court decisions; its powers are derived from statute.
Courts Act 1971, Senior Courts Act 1981
If the CPS wishes to challenge a Magistrates' Court decision on procedure, it must do so through judicial review, not by attempting to re-litigate the issue in the Crown Court.
None explicitly stated, but implied throughout the judgment.
Outcomes
Judicial review granted.
The Crown Court lacked jurisdiction to hear the bail appeal because the Magistrates' Court had lawfully disposed of it due to the CPS's procedural failings. The Crown Court's actions bypassed the protections afforded by the 1993 Act.
Declaratory relief granted.
To declare that the Snaresbrook Crown Court lacked jurisdiction to determine the appeal and remand the claimant.