R v H [2009] ECWA Crim 2899

Reversing the ruling of the trial judge the Court of Appeal held propensity of a non-defendant to commit the crime in issue is admissible under s100 Criminal Justice Act 2003. If identity is in issue, propensity of a non defendant to commit the offence may have substantial probative value in relation to a matter in issue in accordance with s100 (1)(b) Criminal Justice Act 2003

R v Horncastle [2009] EWCA Crim 964

The Supreme Court held a defendant’s right to a fair to trial would not be breached if the sole or decisive evidence against him was a hearsay statement from an absent witness. Providing the provisions of s116-129 Criminal Justice Act 2003 were observed the defendant would receive a fair trial. The court found the European Court of Human Rights in Al-Khawaga and Tahery v United Kingdom [2009] ECHR 110 did not sufficiently take into account the domestic process. In such circumstances the court could decline to follow the principle stated in Al-Khawaga.

R v Bell [2010] EWCA Crim 3

In certain narrow circumstances the prosecution have the right to pursue a third trial following two previous jury disagreements and in the absence of fresh evidence. This right should be exercised with caution and only where the alleged crime was extremely grave and the evidence remained very powerful.
(Patrick Dennis)