Key Facts
- •Mr. Bryn Richards (Appellant) was convicted in Great Yarmouth Magistrates Court for Covid regulation breaches.
- •He brought a claim under the Human Rights Act 1998 against the CPS and the Magistrates Court, alleging unlawful withholding of evidence and breach of Article 6 rights.
- •The Master struck out his claim, finding it to be without merit.
- •Richards appealed this decision, arguing the Master wrongly dismissed the case and failed to consider his lack of representation.
- •Richards' appeal was against the striking out of his claim, not the original conviction.
Legal Principles
CPR 3.4(2): Grounds for striking out a statement of case (no reasonable grounds, abuse of process, failure to comply with rules).
Civil Procedure Rules
CPR 52.6: Permission to appeal requires a real prospect of success or other compelling reason.
Civil Procedure Rules
CPR 52.21(3): Appeal court will allow appeal if lower court's decision was wrong or unjust due to procedural irregularity.
Civil Procedure Rules
Human Rights Act 1998, section 7(5): One-year time limit for claims.
Human Rights Act 1998
Human Rights Act 1998, section 9: Restrictions on claims related to judicial acts.
Human Rights Act 1998
Abuse of process: Bringing a claim in the wrong forum (e.g., civil court instead of criminal appeal).
Case law (Dexter Ltd v Vlieland-Boddy, Johnson v Gore Wood & Co, Mazhar v Lord Chancellor, Mazhar v Birmingham Community Healthcare NHS Trust)
Outcomes
Permission to appeal refused.
The court found the Master's decision was correct. The claims against both the Magistrates Court and the CPS were barred by section 9 of the Human Rights Act 1998, and the claim was also an abuse of process.