The prosecution's use of the same intercepted communications in multiple trials of co-conspirators for different conspiracies does not constitute an abuse of process where the evidence was relevant and admissible in each trial for the purposes relied upon, and where the impugned evidence was only a minor part of the Crown case. An accused who is legally represented and fails to object to judicial remarks giving rise to apprehended bias before verdict waives the right to raise the issue on appeal. The absence of an instructing solicitor due to reduced legal aid funding does not automatically result in a miscarriage of justice; the inquiry is fact-specific and depends on the nature and complexity of the trial.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.