Director of Public Prosecutions (Appellant) v Chris Durham also called Bouye (deceased) and 2 others (Respondents) (Trinidad and Tobago)

Case summary

Case ID

JCPC/2023/0007

Jurisdiction

Trinidad and Tobago

Parties

Appellant(s)

Director of Public Prosecutions

Respondent(s)

(1) Chris Durham also called Bouye (deceased) (2) Ian Salandy also called Bibi (3) Deon Calliste also called Bom

Issue

Did the Court of Appeal err in:failing to apply the established case law & principles in relation to the Respondent's challenge of the DPP's decision to continue the prosecution and/or in relation to whether the criminal trial judge had sufficient and appropriate tools to deal with the Respondents' complaints; concluding that the DPP's decision to allow the criminal trial process to deal with the Respondent's complaints was so exceptional as to be reviewable on the grounds of irrationality and/or abuse of process; concluding that it was unnecessary to the High Court's reasoning to make a finding that the DPP's sole eyewitness had committed perjury; and concluding that the High Court was correct to have granted leave for judicial review.

Facts

This appeal arises from the judicial review of decisions of the DPP to continue the prosecutions of the Respondents who were accused of three murders. They were committed to stand trial for those murders. The trial judge then quashed the indictments, and the accused were released.Mr. Benjamin was the DPP's sole eyewitness who could testify as to the link, if any, between the accused and the murders. His testimony at the preliminary inquiry before the magistrate was that, very shortly after hearing gunshots he saw the three accused nearby on a track with what appeared to be firearms, thus linking them with the nearby murders.On 1 March 2019, the case had been adjourned for trial and case management hearings were proceeding. On 23 April 2019, developments in relation to Mr. Benjamin just before trial gave rise to the application for judicial review and the instant appeal. On that date Mr. Benjamin told two prosecutors that he had not in fact seen the accused on the track, or anywhere in the vicinity of the murders, or at all. He assured the prosecutors however that he would repeat his earlier testimony at the upcoming criminal trial although he had now told them that it had been false.On 17 May 2019, the prosecuting attorneys drew to the attention of the defence attorneys their serious concerns about continued prosecution of the accused. On an application for disclosure prompted by that indication an order was made by the trial judge that prosecutors disclose their notes of the relevant conversation with Mr Benjamin. Disclosure of those notes was then made. The prosecuting team was then replaced. However, the DPP declined to discontinue the prosecution. The High Court quashed the indictments and ordered the release of the three accused. The Court of Appeal dismissed the DPP's appeal. The DPP now appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.

Date of issue

22 December 2022

Judgment details

Judgment date

18 July 2024

Neutral citation

[2024] UKPC 21

Judgment links

Judgment summary

18 July 2024

Appeal

Justices

Lord Reed

Lord Hodge

Lord Lloyd-Jones

Lord Briggs

Lady Carr

Hearing dates

Start date

25 April 2024

End date

25 April 2024

Watch hearings

Back to top