Brants v DPP, (2011) 175 J.P. 246; Official Transcript
The CPS could not explain the reasons for the delay arising out of no less than 13 adjournments in responding to the simple and reasonable request to provide the digital information, and the events had been wholly unacceptable. Whilst the CPS might be short-staffed and hard-pressed, to procrastinate and pass simple administrative tasks from one employee to another and to then engage in correspondence attempting to justify the delay consumed far more resources than completing the task at once. Such conduct should not have occurred and merited censure.
Case DetailsCase Name: Brants v DPP, (2011) 175 J.P. 246; Official Transcript
Case Date: March 2011
Case Type (info): Road Transport; Road Traffic offences; Abuse of process; Delay; Disclosure.