R v SDQ

Certification under section 33(2) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968 requires a decision involving a point of law of general public importance which ought to be considered by the Supreme Court. Where the Court of Appeal has applied binding authority to the particular facts and decided no issue of law, that statutory criterion is not met. The application for certification was therefore refused.

The Court of Appeal had earlier allowed a prosecution appeal against a Crown Court decision staying proceedings as an abuse of process because of unconscionable delay by the police and the Crown Prosecution Service. The applicant then sought certification under section 33(2) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968. The Court stated that it had applied the binding decision of Attorney General's Reference No 2 of 2001 [2004] 2 AC 72 to the facts and had decided no issue of law.

Application for certification refused.

1. The applicant sought certification under section 33(2) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968, asserting that the Court’s substantive decision involved a point of law of general public importance which ought to be considered by the Supreme Court.
2. The substantive appeal concerned a Crown Court stay of prosecution as an abuse of process, based on unconscionable delay by the police and the Crown Prosecution Service. The Court of Appeal had allowed the prosecution appeal on 15 January 2026.
3. In reaching its substantive decision, the Court applied the binding House of Lords decision in Attorney General's Reference No 2 of 2001 [2004] 2 AC 72 to the particular facts. It did not decide any issues of law.
4. Accordingly, the statutory basis for certification was absent and the Court refused to certify the decision for consideration by the Supreme Court.
5. The Court recorded that it had received detailed letters from the Director of Public Prosecutions and the relevant Chief Constable explaining the causes of the delay and the corrective measures taken. Those responses were considered appropriate and did not affect the refusal of certification.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): On 21 May 2026, the Court refused to certify its substantive decision for consideration by the Supreme Court: [2026] EWCA Crim 828.
• Crown Court: The prosecution had been stayed as an abuse of process because of unconscionable delay. The Court of Appeal allowed the prosecution appeal on 15 January 2026; the substantive judgment was subject to statutory reporting restrictions.