Court of Appeal rules miscarriage of justice compensation law does not breach ECHR

11th April 2016

Mathew Gullick was junior counsel for the Justice Secretary in The Queen (on the applications of Hallam and Nealon) v Secretary of State for Justice [2016] EWCA Civ 355 in which the Court of Appeal has ruled that the definition of “miscarriage of justice” in section 133(1ZA) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 is not incompatible with Article 6(2) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) (the presumption of innocence).  The definition provides that a “miscarriage of justice” giving rise to the right to compensation only occurs when an out-of-time appeal against conviction is allowed because a new or newly discovered fact “shows beyond reasonable doubt that the person did not commit the offence”.

The Master of the Rolls, sitting with the President of the Queen’s Bench Division and Lord Justice Hamblen, upheld the High Court’s decision that it was bound by previous Supreme Court authority that Article 6(2) was not applicable in these circumstances; but that even if it was applicable, the definition (which was introduced with effect from March 2014) did not infringe the presumption of innocence guaranteed by Article 6(2).

The Court of Appeal’s judgment is available here.

The High Court’s judgment from June 2015 is available here.

Please click this link to view Mathew Gullick's profile.