Bournemouth Solicitors

With effect from 31 October 2009 new rules were introduced by the Government to prevent aquitted Defendants who had funded their defence privately from recovering any more than legal aid rate costs.

This change was widely criticised by defence lawyers and a formal challenge was launched by the Law Society at the High Court with the result that the rule introduced by the former Justice Secretary Jack Straw has been declared unlawful.

The effect of this is that acquitted Defendants can after all, recover their costs at almost private client rates (subject to taxation). Defendants who have recieved only partial reimbursement should re-submit a claim for the actual cost incurred for taxation by the National Taxing Team.

As from 1st May 2010 a new, and potentially controversial, obligation has been placed upon Defendants in criminal proceedings.

The effect of this new rule is to require any Defendant who has pleaded not guilty to serve a defence witness notice with fourteen days of initial disclosure giving full names, dates of birth and addresses of defence witnesses.

Failure to comply with this obligation may result in adverse comment by the Court or Prosecutor and is something which the Defendant should discuss carefully with the Defence Team.

Lawyers will wish to consider carefully whether to comply with this obligation, the only sanction for breach is potential adverse inference at Trial and the risk of this may be preferable to serving a Witness notice.

With effect from early 2011 a new motor insurance law comes into force, the effect of which is to require even motor vehicles not kept on the road or in a public place to be insured unless a statutory "Off Road Notification" (SORN) has been made.

Keepers of motor vehicles should be careful to either insure the motor vehicle even if it is not being used or kept on the road or public place or, alternatively make a SORN declaration. In addition, motorists should be aware of the small print in relation to SORN declarations which purport to require the motorist to chase the DVLA if a formal acknowledgement of the SORN declaration is not received.

The Police have a statutory power allowing them to seize motor vehicles being driven without insurance and this is a power which the Police are using increasingly frequently. However, following a recent Court ruling the Police will need to exercise the power with more care as they are likely to be held liable for damages in tort for wrongful inteference with goods should it turn out that, in fact, the driver of the vehicle was insured (case of Pryor -v- Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police- [2011] EWCA Civ 749 refers).

As long ago as 2008 the European Court ruled that the UK Police Forces were acting unlawfully in retaining indefinately DNA profiles, photographs and fingerprints of all arrested persons regardless as to whether they were ever charged or cautioned in respect of any offence.

This has proved to be a controversial development and there are a number of examples of DNA databases providing evidence of serious subsequent offending (the case of R v Hyang-Woo Pyo refers). It is the indefinate rentention of this information which has attracted criticism from the European Court and the UK Government will need to legislate about this.