Regina (Ali) v Secretary of State for Justice; Regina (Dennis) v Same; Regina (Tunbridge) v Same [2014] EWCA Civ 194; [2014] WLR (D) 103
‘In determining whether an individual, whose conviction had been quashed on the basis of new evidence, qualified for compensation under section 133 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 on the ground of miscarriage of justice, the Secretary of State for Justice was required to make a decision by applying the statutory test in accordance with Supreme Court guidance to the facts of the particular case. Those facts could include events which postdated the quashing of the conviction in the event that further facts of relevance to the application of the statutory test arose. The Secretary of State might come to his own view, having regard to the terms of the judgment by the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) quashing the conviction, and provided the decision did not conflict with that judgment. The decision was then amenable to judicial review on conventional grounds of challenge, not merely because the court would have reached a different view. Save in exceptional circumstances, it should not be necessary for the court to engage in a detailed review of the facts.’
WLR Daily, 27th February 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
