The Court of Appeal’s (Criminal Division) annual report for 2008/09 shows another busy and demanding year’s work in hearing appeals against conviction and sentences.
The statistics show a very slight fall in overall applications from the previous year (6769 against 6854). Waiting times for conviction appeals were reduced to 9.4 months where leave to appeal was granted. However, waiting times for sentence appeals rose slightly by 0.3 months to 4.3 months.
As ever, the statistics provide only a partial record of the work undertaken by the Court of Appeal, which in the past year heard a number of weighty and complex cases. This is illustrated in the rise of the number of appeals heard by a five strong bench, which provided particularly authoritative decisions in a number of cases with difficult issues to resolve. This led to a consequential reduction in the number of cases required to be considered by the House of Lords/Supreme Court.
Writing in the report’s foreword, which also marked his first year in office, Lord Judge, the Lord Chief Justice, applauded the Court of Appeal’s performance in responding rapidly to urgent cases. He also drew attention to a number of significant judgments, which have influenced sentencing practice in the lower courts, and provided guidance for issues arising from new legislation.
These included:
- R v Mayers & others – this set the terms for the circumstances in which witness anonymity orders would be set, following the Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Act 2008;
- R v Whittle & others – the Court had to determine the sentencing for cartel offenders, guilty of price fixing under the terms of the Enterprise Act 2002;
- Attorney General’s Reference (No’s. 49 of 2008) saw substantial increases in sentences for offences where injury was caused by knives. The judgment was widely quoted in the media – "Those who carry knives in the street and then use them to wound or injure must expect severe punishment – no ifs, no buts, no perhaps. We must do what we can to eradicate this dreadful knife problem";
- R v Saw & others – this judgment increased the starting point for sentencing of burglaries of domestic dwellings in view of the serious adverse consequences the offence invariably caused to victims; and
- A number of cases relating to terrorism offences, such as R v Worrell , in which an appeal against sentence was dismissed, despite the trial judge sentencing at the top end of the range.
Full details of the Court’s statistical performance, and a more comprehensive summary of noteworthy cases appears in the full report, which can be accessed online
Ends
