Proceeding contribution from Viscount Hailsham (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 8 July 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Bill.
Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Bill
I am sorry, but my hon. Friend is wrong about that. The case will fall to the extent that the common law power will be replaced by statute, in a sense, so the fact that judges hitherto have made orders that they were not entitled to make will not by itself be grounds for appeal. However, if the protective measures render a trial unfair—as was the case in Davis—the orders will not be made. If they were made, the convictions would be quashed.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 478 c1313
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Disclosure of information Admissibility of evidence Criminal proceedings Appeals Crime Common law Evidence Human rights European Convention on Human Rights House of Lords Intimidation Judgements Protection Sentencing Witnesses Trials Sunset clauses
- Legislation
- Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Bill 2007-08
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2025-01-04 09:30:47 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_494643
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_494643
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_494643