R v Caydon Hutchinson
(Approved) 1. THE VICE-PRESIDENT: I need to pronounce the decision of the court, comprising myself and Garnham J, in the case of Caydon Hutchinson, whose appeal was heard and determined on 3 October 2024. 2. It is necessary to reopen the determination in order to correct an error. The court, in allowing the appeal and quashing the sentence imposed below,...
2 min de lecture · 224 mots
(Approved) 1. THE VICE-PRESIDENT: I need to pronounce the decision of the court, comprising myself and Garnham J, in the case of Caydon Hutchinson, whose appeal was heard and determined on 3 October 2024. 2. It is necessary to reopen the determination in order to correct an error. The court, in allowing the appeal and quashing the sentence imposed below, purported to impose a sentence of three years' detention in a young offender institution. By reason of the appellant's age at the date of his conviction the court had no power to impose that sentence. 3. We therefore reopen the determination. We set aside the sentence previously imposed and substitute for it a sentence of three years' detention pursuant to section 250 of the Sentencing Code. 4. We direct, pursuant to section 240A of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, that 198 days will count as time served as part of that sentence to reflect the period when the appellant was on bail subject to a qualifying curfew. Epiq Europe Ltd hereby certify that the above is an accurate and complete record of the proceedings or part thereof. Lower Ground Floor, 46 Chancery Lane, London, WC2A 1JE Tel No: 020 7404 1400 Email: [email protected]
Sources officielles : consulter la page source
Open Justice Licence (The National Archives).
Articles similaires
A propos de cette decision
Décisions similaires
Royaume-Uni
First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) – Information Rights
Beacon Counselling Trust v The Information Commissioner & Anor
Introduction to the Appeal 1. On 23 May 2024, the Appellant submitted a request (“the Request”) to the Leeds and York Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (“the Trust”) for copies of correspondence making reference to the Appellant, which had been sent to or from a named person at the Trust from 1 February 2023 to the date of the Request. 2....
Royaume-Uni
High Court (Chancery Division)
Kalaivani Jaipal Kirishani v George Major
Sir Anthony Mann : Introduction 1. This is an appeal from an order of HHJ Gerald sitting in the County Court at Central London dated 23rd December 2024 in which he dismissed two of three claims made by Ms Kirishana as claimant against her former cohabitee Mr Major. The claims were for a contribution to household and other domestic expenses,...
Royaume-Uni
High Court (Insolvency and Companies List)
Joanna Rich v JDDR Capital Limited
ICC JUDGE AGNELLO KC: Introduction 1. This is the judgment in relation to an application to set aside a statutory demand against Mrs Joanna Rich (Mrs Rich) and a petition against Mr Clive Rich (Mr Rich) relating to the same debt claimed under a personal guarantee provided by them in relation to a loan granted to LawBit Limited (Lawbit). Mr...