Lady Black,
Lord Lloyd-Jones,
Lord Briggs,
Lord Hamblen,
Lord Stephens
Judgment date
13 November 2020
Language
English
Summary
Emergency Regulations permitting a judge to sit remotely are valid; remote judging not inherently unfair, trial judge to assess fairness.
Flynote
Constitutional law – judicial sittings – interpretation of emergency regulations permitting remote hearings; statutory construction and purposive approach; limits on subsidiary legislation where Constitution implies forum is territorial; criminal procedure – fair trial and inequality of arms – remote judging not per se unfair; case‑management discretion of trial judge; inherent jurisdiction – remote participation permissible where hearing takes place in territorial courtroom.
Emergency Regulations permitting a judge to sit remotely are valid; remote judging not inherently unfair, trial judge to assess fairness.
Flynote
Constitutional law – judicial sittings – interpretation of emergency regulations permitting remote hearings; statutory construction and purposive approach; limits on subsidiary legislation where Constitution implies forum is territorial; criminal procedure – fair trial and inequality of arms – remote judging not per se unfair; case‑management discretion of trial judge; inherent jurisdiction – remote participation permissible where hearing takes place in territorial courtroom.
Loading PDF...
This document is 115.4 KB. Do you want to load it?