This session is all about an examination of recent legislation and deals with some of the legal issues thrown up by it. There is an awful lot to get through in 1-hour. The object of the exercise being to massively increase your knowledge in the area of recent legislation – difficult to keep up-to-date with everything that is happening at the moment.

• The Coronavirus Act 2020 – What exactly can you do and what exactly can you not do – at the risk of incurring a rather hefty fixed penalty if you fall foul of it. There will undoubtedly be legal challenges to all of this in due course.
• The Terrorist Offenders (Restriction on Early Release) Act 2020. The new Schedule 19ZA inserted into the Criminal Justice Act 2003 and the implications for those subject to it (including prisoners already serving a sentence as the Act is retrospective) – came into force on the 26th February 2020
• Statutory Instrument 2020 No.158 – came into force on the 1st April 2020 and amended the period of time a defendant must actually serve (two thirds rather than a half) if sentenced for an offence mentioned in Schedule 15 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 – the sentence being for 7 years or more
• The Offensive Weapons Act 2019 – lots to consider in this piece of legislation – not least Knife Crime Prevention Orders which are currently being piloted in the London Courts
• Issues surrounding the Stalking Protection Act 2019 – prohibitions and requirements within the Order including the requirement to disclose a PIN?
• Issues surrounding the Voyerism (offences) Act 2019 – the interrelationship between this piece of legislation and the Notification Requirements under Part 2 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003

Learning aims & objectives:

• The bones of the Coronavirus Act 2020
• Just who precisely can be released at the half-way stage of their sentence these days
• The ever expanding role of the Parole Board in determining release
• A look at the various Schedules of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 – Schedules 15, 15B,18A and, the most recent, 19ZA
• Knife Crime Prevention Orders upon application
• Knife Crime Prevention Orders as an Ancillary Order upon conviction
• The interrelationship between the Stalking Protection Act 2019 and the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000
• The interrelationship between the Voyeurism (Offences) Act 2019 and the Sexual Offences Act 2003

This session is an examination of important recent Case-Law from the Court of Appeal and High Court – we are getting decisions daily; the problem is finding the time to keep up with it all. The cases have been specifically chosen because they deal with important issues which crop up regularly in the life of a busy criminal practitioner – whether you are for the defence, prosecution or an adviser to the Magistrates’. Other cases will also be discussed.

• [2020] EWHC 452 (Admin) – no name as ongoing – the High Court considered the bail status of a defendant appearing on a Requisition in the local Magistrates’ Court
• R v Daniel Harvey – the case considered the meaning of the words ‘where 2 or more offences are charged on the same occasion’ when dealing with theft by way of low-value shoplifting and aggregating the values
• R v Burrows – again, low-value shoplifting – circumstances in which it could be a count on the indictment at the Crown Court and the circumstances in which it could not
• James William Brown and the DPP – the High Court considering the 6-month time limit in relation to summary -only offences when commencing proceedings by way of a Written Charge and Requisition
• Dougall and the CPS – the circumstances in which an either-way offence may be amended to a summary one – and the circumstances in which it may not!
• R v McGarrick – assaults upon emergency workers under the Assaults on Emergency Workers (Offences) Act 2018

Learning aims & objectives:

• The aim of this 1-hour session is to make you familiar with some really important Case-Law
• We had in April of this year the very interesting case of MANNING and the comments of the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) in relation to whether or not the current Coronavirus pandemic was a factor that could be considered in the suspension of a sentence of imprisonment
• We shall also consider the very latest pronouncements in the area of credit for guilty pleas and the position regarding credit in the area of mandatory minimum sentences
• At the end of the hour you should be better informed and able to use the relevant Case- Law in your role as an adviser to a client or the advocate/adviser in Court

Arguably, one of the unintended consequences of the Criminal Procedure Rules is the impact they have had on “disclosure”. Part 8 is specifically designed to deal with Initial Details of the Prosecution Case (IDPC). But many other parts have had a significant impact on the duties upon advocates to provide disclosure of the defence or disclose issues in advance to ensure parties are “playing by the rules”.

This course will start with a brief précis of Part 8, before delving into the case-law to examine duties imposed upon parties to disclose details. In particular, it will consider the thorny issue of whether the defence are still entitled to put the Prosecution to proof.

• The extent of Part 8 of the Criminal Procedure Rules
• Defence disclosure of witnesses – what’s required?
• R (on the application of Tinnion) v Reading Crown Court
• Case management powers under the Criminal Procedure Rules – Randell v DPP
• R v Rochford – How far do the rules encroach on the right to silence and can you still put the Crown to strict proof?
• R v Penner – What duty is there on an advocate to raise issues?
• R v Boardman – Issues of disclosure – stay quiet or pay the price?
• R (on the application of Valiati) v DPP- What to disclose and where?
• R v Musone – Bad character & disclosure

Learning aims & objectives:

This course aims to give practitioners a good working knowledge of disclosure and the Criminal Procedure Rules, but more importantly, it intends to supplement that knowledge with the case-law that explains what it really means in day to day practice.

It’s one thing to read the Rules; it’s another to understand what the practical effect of them all is with regard to case management. This course will arm practitioners with that vital practical information and the comprehension they need to apply them to real world scenarios.

Consent in sexual offences is an inherently complex topic. The belief, or absence of belief, is often the key issue to be considered by a jury. In considering this vexed issue, occasionally the complainant’s previous sexual history may be relevant.

This course will consider the issue of consent, as now defined by the Sexual Offences Act 2003, before going on to consider the admissibility of previous sexual conduct of the complainant. In particular, this course will consider:

• The statutory definition of consent under the 2003 Act
• How has the case-law augmented the legislation?
• In what circumstances might the complainant’s previous sexual history be relevant?
• Section 41 YJCE Act 1999 – what does the law say?
• R v A – what was the impact of the House of Lords decisions on s. 41?
• R v Ched Evans – what was it all about?
• What is the “so similar” test – is it the same as striking similarity?

Learning aims & objectives:

This course aims to give practitioners a comprehensive introduction to the law of consent and the admissibility of previous sexual behaviour at trial. With heightened publicity around this area in recent years, it’s never been more important for advocates to be able to deal with such applications competently and carefully.

The contents of this course will provide practitioners with the foundations they need to confidently address the court with regards to s. 41 applications along with the leading cases on the interpretation of it.

As well as Crown Court advocates, this course will be of equal relevance to those undertaking sexual offences cases in the youth court, with its ever-increasing remit following the return of its power to commit for sentence post-trial.