Regina v M(L) and Others; Regina v Tabot; Regina v Tijani  EWCA Crim 2327 ;  WLR(D) 266
“Where a person was a victim of human trafficking, for the purposes of the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (CETS No 197), and whilst retaining some nexus with the trafficking committed an offence which arguably called, in the public interest, for prosecution, the decision whether to prosecute depended on whether the offence committed was serious enough to call for prosecution, which in turn depended on all the circumstances of the case, the gravity of the offence alleged, the degree of continuing compulsion, and the alternatives reasonably available to the defendant. The prosecution was not obliged by art 10 of the Convention to advise a defendant’s solicitors of the availability of human trafficking referral agencies or to refer a represented defendant to those agencies, unless there were something unusual about the defendant’s case, but were obliged to remind the defendant’s solicitors of the existence of those agencies.”
WLR Daily, 25th October 2010
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.