R v Ghulam – WLR Daily

Posted October 23rd, 2009 in evidence, fitness to plead, insanity, law reports, statutory interpretation by sally

R v Ghulam; [2009] WLR (D) 303

“The word ‘determination’ in s 4(6) of the Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 refers only to a determination that a defendant is unfit to plead so that, where that provision’s requirement for evidence from two or more registered medical practitioners to be before the court has not been met, the trial judge is not bound to adjourn the trial but may properly conclude that the defendant is fit to plead and that the trial may continue.”

WLR Daily, 22nd October 2009

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.