Case Nos: CA-2024-002167 - [2025] EWCA Civ 1230

The Issues on Appeal

It is important for both appeals to be considered in their proper context, namely the hearing of a bail application. Thereafter, it is convenient to take the principal point raised by the CPS on its appeal first, namely whether or not the CPS has the benefit of the core immunity. The answer to that question allows for a proper consideration of the issues raised by the police in their appeal.

The central issue raised by the CPS is whether Ritchie J failed to apply settled law as to the extent of the immunity applying to words spoken by an advocate in court. The CPS contends that he was wrong to find that it was in some way “evidential”, and that it needed to be justified on the facts in every case. It is submitted that the immunity would become unworkable if the application of the immunity in any given case could only be determined after the event.

The police raise first the issue of an unqualified advocate’s immunity. It is then said that, by an established extension of the advocate’s immunity, there can be no claim against the police. There is an alternative argument that the provision of the information by the police to the CPS was protected by witness immunity.

There are two further grounds of appeal, common to both appeals, as to: i) whether any immunity that we do find extends to all XGY’s claims in these proceedings; and ii) whether XGY had the necessary standing pursuant to section 7 to make the HRA claims in any event.