Skip to main content

Expert comment: Court of Appeal makes 'joint enterprise' ruling – University of Reading

Show access keys

Expert comment: Court of Appeal makes 'joint enterprise' ruling

Release Date 31 October 2016

Dr Beatrice Krebs, School of Law lecturer at the University of Reading, said:

"In its decision to reject the challenge of 13 guilty verdicts made under the joint enterprise law, the Court of Appeal stresses that reversing injustice is not the only goal. Other interests also need to be taken into account, namely the interests of the victims and the victims' families, the public interest that there be finality to legal proceedings and legal certainty.

"It therefore applies a very demanding test in considering whether leave to appeal should be granted following the Supreme Court's decision in Jogee: the would-be appellant has to show that he has been done a ‘substantial injustice'.

"To do so, he would have to show that it is likely that, if properly directed (in the terms of Jogee rather than the prior, mistaken view of the law), the jury would have reached a different result than it did. None of the would-be-appellants whose cases were being considered by the Court of Appeal managed to discharge this test.

"This is because the facts were such that it was clear to the Court that the jury would very likely have returned the exact same verdict, even if it had not been directed in terms of parasitic accessory liability."

We use Javascript to improve your experience on, but it looks like yours is turned off. Everything will still work, but it is even more beautiful with Javascript in action. Find out more about why and how to turn it back on here.
We also use cookies to improve your time on the site, for more information please see our cookie policy.