What if the Magistrates Get it Wrong?

Section 8 A – Magistrates Court Act 1980

If a bench of Magistrates or a District Judge make a ruling, it will generally be regarded as a pre-trial ruling. This means that it is binding until the proceedings have concluded. These rulings will generally refer to:

-         Bad Character Evidence

-         Hearsay evidence

-         Admissibility

This can be particularly difficult where a new legal representative takes over conduct of a case . However, Section 8B permits the ruling to be varied where:

a.      It is in the interests of justice for the ruling to be varied;

b.     There has been a material change in circumstances since the application was made.

When a Court is determining an application of this sort, guidance can be taken from the position at case law prior to the introduction of Section 8B. In Newham Juvenile Court, ex parte F (a minor) [1986] it was held that ‘Once a decision has been made after proper inquiry and consideration of all relevant factors, it cannot be reversed merely by re-examining the case afresh on the same material’.

The Court continued to state that ‘if circumstances are brought to the attention of the court which, although existing when the original decision was taken, were not then drawn to the attention of the court’.

In R. (on the application of Poskitt) v Reading Magistrates' Court [2018], the Administrative Court held that it was proper to use the power

under Section 8B where details of a caution had been disclosed since the application was originally heard. Para [20] states:

I reject this submission. I am satisfied that when the decision was made on 1 February, there was a material change of circumstances since the first ruling on 29 November refusing the admission of bad character evidence, namely the disclosure of the details of the convictions. Since the hearing on 29 November, the CPS had disclosed the details of the two cautions, notice was given of the application to admit bad character evidence on the basis of that disclosure and at the hearing, all parties in the court were aware of the relevant facts. Moreover, the Crown did not object to the admission of the cautions.

This is a very complex area of law and one which is widely regarded as under-utilised. If deployed correctly, it can turn a hopeless case into one which has a real chance of succeeding. It can also be a cost-efficient way of ensuring that matters are dealt with at the first attempt rather than necessitating an appeal.