Stephen Dalton, R (on the application of) v Chair of the Police Appeals Tribunal
[2024] EWHC 1116 (Admin)
Dean Francis v Director Public Prosecutions
25 March 2024
[2024] EWHC 688 (Admin)
High Court
A police officer hurt someone. The prosecution decided not to proceed with the case due to new evidence. The injured person sued, arguing the decision was wrong. The judge said the prosecution's decision was fair based on the new evidence and previous case law, so the lawsuit failed.
Key Facts
- •Dean Francis (Claimant) was seriously injured by Michael Harding (Interested Party), a serving police officer, on May 15, 2018.
- •Harding was charged with s.20 GBH and s.1A dangerous driving.
- •The CPS decided to offer no evidence against Harding due to expert evidence suggesting Harding swerved to avoid Francis, not deliberately hitting him.
- •Francis sought judicial review of the CPS decision and an interim injunction preventing the CPS from communicating the 'offer no evidence' decision to the Crown Court.
- •The interim injunction was initially granted by Linden J but is now subject to this appeal.
Legal Principles
On an application for interim relief in judicial review, the court considers whether there is a real issue to be tried and whether the balance of convenience favors granting the interim order. This involves balancing the harm to the claimant if relief is not granted against the harm to the defendant and public interest if it is.
Administrative Court Judicial Review Guide 2023, §16.6.1; R (Medical Justice) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] EWHC 1425 (Admin); American Cyanamid Company v Ethicon Ltd [1975] AC 396
Victims have a common law right to seek a review of a decision not to prosecute; the CPS is bound to conduct a review to avoid the need for judicial review.
R v Killick [2011] EWCA Crim 1608, R (L) v Director of Public Prosecutions [2013] EWHC 1752 (Admin), R (Hayes) v Crown Prosecution Service [2018] EWHC 327 (Admin)
Judicial review of a decision not to prosecute is possible only in very rare circumstances (unlawful policy, failure to follow own policy, perverse decision).
R (L) v Director of Public Prosecutions [2013] EWHC 1752 (Admin)
The Victims' Right to Review (VRR) scheme does not require a review to be conducted before a decision to offer no evidence is implemented, even if this means the review cannot affect the outcome.
R (Hayes) v Crown Prosecution Service [2018] EWHC 327 (Admin)
Outcomes
The interim injunction was discharged.
While a real issue to be tried exists regarding whether judicial review can precede a VRR review in 'offer no evidence' cases, the claimant failed to demonstrate a real issue to be tried regarding the lawfulness of the decision itself. The court found the CPS's consideration of the evidence was adequate and the 'offer no evidence' decision was not unlawful. The court also followed the precedent in *R (Hayes) v Crown Prosecution Service* regarding the timing of VRR reviews.
Similar Cases
Jessica Rooks, R (on the application of) v Crown Prosecution Service
[2024] EWHC 1941 (Admin)
Ben Whitehead v Westminster Magistrates' Court
[2024] EWHC 2868 (Admin)
SIMARPAUL THANDI (R on the application of) v SEVENOAKS MAGISTRATES' COURT
[2023] EWHC 507 (Admin)
Malcolm Huntley Potier, R (on the application of) v Southwark Crown Court
[2024] EWHC 416 (Admin)