Legal first: successful judicial review claim on bail appeals

For the first time in England and Wales, a claimant has succeeded in a judicial review claim about the law of bail appeals under the Bail (Amendment) Act 1993. Alex Benn appeared for the claimant.

In R (Molina) v Snaresbrook Crown Court [2024] EWHC 816 (Admin), the High Court granted the claim on all grounds of challenge. In its reasoning, the court took a firm approach to protecting a person’s liberty, a theme also seen in recent decisions on writs of habeas corpus.

Background

In November 2022, the claimant had been granted bail by Barkingside Magistrates’ Court. However, the prosecution failed to give proper oral notice and the claimant was released from the cells. The prosecution never served him with written notice, but relied on the authority of R (Cardin) v Birmingham Crown Court [2017] EWHC 2101 (Admin) and invited the court to declare him unlawfully at large. Despite the magistrates ruling that there would be no appeal, the case was listed in Snaresbrook two days later. The judge decided that she had jurisdiction and remanded the claimant in custody.

Decision

Sitting as the Divisional Court, Davies LJ and Bennathan J held that the Resident Judge of Snaresbrook Crown Court had: (1) exceeded her jurisdiction; (2) erred in law by deciding that the required oral notice had been given and written notice served; and (3) erred in law by deciding that, in any event, bail was a matter for her because the case was listed in the Crown Court. The court also held that the Crown Prosecution Service had proceeded when it knew—or should have known—that there was no jurisdiction to do so.

In its judgment, the Divisional Court addresses the meaning of oral notice and the service of written notice under Bail (Amendment) Act 1993, the application of the Criminal Procedure Rules 2020, and the relationship between the 1993 Act and section 51 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998.