law pages of Bournemouth and Poole College.
R. (Chief Constable of Greater Manchester) v Salford Magistrates’ Court and Hookway  EWHC 1578 (Admin)Friday 29 July 2011 at 3:37 pm | In News | Post Comment
[Police – bail – court – procedure – legislation]
D, the Manchester police appealed against a High Court decision that had caused consternation in the police and the Home Office. A magistrate had ruled that the detention clock did not stop running when a suspect was bailed; which was universally understood by all police forces to be the case. The ruling was upheld by the High Court.
Held: A question was certified by the High Court, and very unusually for a criminal case, there was a leap-frog appeal to the Supreme Court. Mr Hookway who was a Respondent to the Supreme Court proceedings, withdrew from the appeal, because on 12 July 2011 the Police (Detention and Bail) Act 2011 received Royal Assent. The effect of the 2011 Act is to amend PACE to make clear that any periods spent by an arrested person on police bail shall not be counted when calculating the total period of time spent by an arrested person in police detention before charge. That is, to give clear statutory authority for the orthodoxy of the past – i.e. the practice adopted by police officers prior to the decision of the High Court.
The Act purports to be retrospective, again this is extremely rare.
The matter is closed.
Lion Steel Equipment Ltd is to be charged with corporate manslaughter under the Corporate Manslaughter and Homicide Act (CMHA) 2007. This will be only the second case of corporate manslaughter to reach the courts.
The first hearing is on on 2 August 2011.
The charge follows the death of an employee who fell through a roof at the company’s Hyde headquarters in 2008.
Three of the company’s directors should also be charged with gross negligence manslaughter under the CMHA.
The first case brought under the CMHA, against Cotswold Geotechnical Holdings, failed to provide the insight into likely fine levels due to the company’s “parlous financial state” and resulting fine of £385,000. The Sentencing Guidelines on Corporate Manslaughter (issued in February 2010) suggest that fines would be expected to start from £500,000 and rise into the millions.
Greater , 19 May 2011 means that suspects cannot be released on police bail for more than 96 hours, and is a disaster for police on a national scale.
The government will bring forward “emergency” legislation to reverse the effect of Hookway, the Act will receive Royal Assent within the next 14 days.
The decision, which relates to a case involving Greater Manchester Police (GMP), means that thousands of potential suspects, including those being investigated for murder and rape, would have to be released without charge, and only re-arrested if new evidence emerges.
Under current measures, suspects can be released on bail pending further inquires for weeks, or even months, in some cases.
The Hookway case was heard by Mr Justice McCombe in the High Court in May.
The initial ruling was made by the district judge at Salford Magistrates’ Court, who said the detention clock continued to run while the suspect was on bail.
Paul Hookway, a murder suspect, was arrested in November last year. Police had been given permission to detain him for 36 hours but he was released after 28.
Five months later, GMP applied to the courts to extend the period of detention from 36 hours to the maximum of 96 hours. But the district judge refused, saying that the 96 hours had expired months ago.
The ruling means the ‘detention clock’ could not be stopped which has been the practice across all forces over the past 25 years.
Chief Constable Jim Baker-McCardle, ACPO lead on this issue, said:
“This ruling has a profound impact on how the police have investigated crime under a legal framework interpreted and used during the last 25 years. Unless overturned, the indications are its effect is that police can no longer put anyone out on bail for more than 96 hours without either being in a position to charge or release.
What of cases which relied on confessions obtained in breach of PACE?
There may be millions of cases of bail since 1 January 1986 when PACE 1984 came in to force, will they now have been unlawfuly detained and so eligible for compensation, via the Legal Ombudsman – legislation cannot be retrospective and so would not normally deal with such issues.
Claims could only go back 6 years, but this would still be expensive for the government.
This case is headed straight to the Supreme Court at the end of July.