The Supreme Courtasad-khan

The court did not allow the oral introduction of a new argument that SXH’s prosecution constituted a breach of her art 8 rights in its continuation, if not in its commencement. Had this been a live issue, analysis would be required in relation to whether and, if so, in what circumstances art 8 may become applicable to the CPS in the continuation of a prosecution, if it was not applicable at the time of its commencement. Arguably, a defendant’s right to a prompt and fair disposal of properly instituted criminal proceedings gravitated more towards ECHR, art 6 rather than to the broader structure of art 8. However, the court preferred not to express a view on the point in the absence of considered argument. Continue reading »