202403821 B2 - [2025] EWCA Crim 1205

The appeal proceedings:

In support of her application for an extension of time, the applicant relies on a statement by the solicitor whom she instructed in January 2024. It sets out the action taken, and the delays encountered, since then.

Initially, the respondent did not intend to oppose any of the applications. However, at a short hearing on 18 March 2025 the court raised a number of issues in respect of which it wished to receive more detailed submissions, and gave directions in that regard. The parties complied with those directions, and the applicant’s representatives made further enquiries of her trial representatives.

As a precautionary measure, and pending full argument, the court directed that the applicant’s name should be anonymised as “ARW” when listing both that hearing and the subsequent full hearing, and that her true name should not be mentioned in the course of either hearing.

At the full hearing on 8 May 2025, the respondent opposed the applications for anonymity. However, whilst recognising that it was for the court to determine whether the convictions were safe, the respondent did not seek to oppose the application for leave, or the appeal, on the merits.

We received detailed submissions on all matters. We shall summarise them quite briefly, but we have taken into account all the many points made on each side. Before doing so, however, it is convenient to refer to some relevant statutory provisions and case law.