CA (A Minor) v Public Prosecution Service

[1] The applicant is aged 17 and is the subject of an allegation of having inflicted grievous bodily harm contrary to Section 20 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861. By the present application she challenges the Public Prosecution Service conclusion that the allegation is not suitable for diversionary disposal as an alternative to prosecution as provided for by the Criminal Justice Children (Northern Ireland) Order 1998.

[2] This application concerns the approach of the PPS to the availability of a diversionary disposal in a case considered by the PPS to involve only partial or limited admissions from the applicant. The applicant seeks an order quashing the decision by which it concluded that the applicant's case was not suitable for diversionary disposal, a declaration that the decision was unlawful, ultra vires and had no force of effect and an order that the matter be reconsidered and determined according to law.

We are satisfied that having looked at the document as a whole and at the sentence in particular that the consideration of whether or not exceptional circumstances are established requires consideration both of the nature of the limited or partial admissions and whether there are cogent public interest considerations in favour of diversion thereby leading to a balanced decision in the public interest as to whether or not diversion is appropriate.

[7] So for those reasons we consider that this is an exceptional case falling within Sharma v Antione which entitles us to intervene and we do so by quashing the decision of the prosecutor and remit the matter to the PPS for the decision to be made according to law.