Adam represented a client who had long standing mental health issues. He was charged with three counts of possessing a bladed article and two breaches of Heathrow byelaws.
After obtaining expert psychiatric evidence it was concluded that the client was not able to understand proceedings but neither a hospital order nor guardianship order was appropriate under s37 of the Mental Health Act 1983. In addition, no special measures or the use of an intermediary would have been of assistance to the defendant.
Consequently, Adam argued that to try the defendant would be an abuse of process as the defendant could not receive a fair trial.
Upon receipt of Adam's skeleton argument and supporting documentation, the Crown conceded that it would not be in the public interest to prosecute the defendant.
Adam was instructed by Seema Dosaj of Berris Law.
