November 3, 2025
David Miller and Trevor Archer represented an appellant who was found unfit to plead in the high profile case ‘Kurtaj v R’ involving hacking offences against BT/EE, Nvidia, Uber, Revolut and Rockstar Games. The Court of Appeal has now issued important guidance on appeals under s.15 Criminal Appeal Act 1968—clarifying representation and funding arrangements for vulnerable defendants following proceedings under s.4A Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964.
In an article for Lexis Nexis, Trevor Archer analysed the Court of Appeal’s approach.
The decision provides crucial guidance for criminal law practitioners working at the intersection of mental capacity and criminal offending, particularly in the context of cyber crime, and clarifies the appeal rights of those found unfit to plead. The article examines how:
- In this instance, the court granted leave to appeal on one ground— that it had been unfair to admit evidence of a prior guilty plea —but ultimately dismissed the appeal as the court found the failure did not render the jury’s finding unsafe.
- Appeals must be led by representatives appointed under CrPR 25.10(3)—no personal applications or fresh instructions allowed.
- Public funding is only available if leave is granted or if there’s a compelling reason after refusal.
Read article here: Court of Appeal issues guidance on appeals for defendants unfit to plead (Kurtaj v R) | News | LexisNexis
News stories:
RLC Counsel:
Instructions:
Niamh Murphy at Tuckers Solicitors
