There are four judgments today: none of them really grab me by the throat, but I’m sure they’ll interest others. There’s a technical one about European Arrest Warrants, Pilecki v Circuit Court of Legnica; technical consolidated criminal appeals about the need for an indictment, Clarke and McDaid; a Norther Irish case about proceeds of crime, In re Maye; and a landlord and tenant case, Majorstake v Curtis.
The Clarke case is of some historical interest because they refer back to the role which Grand Juries once played in England. They are still commonly used in the USA. The case should also make lawyers revisit their approach to procedural matters. As I read this, there has to be a formal indictment from the start otherwise the process is defective. It is, after all, trial upon indictment.
Thanks, watcher. I knew someone would be into at least one of these cases…
and into the bargain Lord Scott managed to illustrate park of his argument by drawing on the exerience of one Harry Potter living under the stair in Privet Drive.