Trial procedure in magistrates' court and Crown Court - Soli...

Learning Outcomes

This article covers trial procedure in magistrates' court and Crown Court and the solicitor's duty to the court, including:

• Distinguishing the procedural stages of summary trials and trials on indictment (opening, proof, submissions, speeches, verdict) and mapping them to SQE1-style scenario questions.
• Applying the Galbraith test accurately to submissions of no case to answer, predicting when a submission is appropriate, and evaluating the consequences if it succeeds or fails.
• Using correct courtroom etiquette and modes of address; selecting and deploying leading and non‑leading questions appropriately in examination‑in‑chief, cross‑examination, and re‑examination to test or clarify evidence.
• Explaining the solicitor’s overriding duty to the court and reconciling it with duties to the client, with particular reference to misleading the court, correcting errors, and deciding when professional withdrawal is required.
• Identifying and managing conflicts, confidentiality, and co‑defendant issues; analysing ethical problems involving false alibis or fabricated evidence while maintaining privilege and compliance with the SRA Code.
• Evaluating practical advocacy decisions—such as whether to call the defendant, how to challenge admissibility, and when to make or resist defence submissions—in light of professional conduct obligations and exam problem questions.

SQE1 Syllabus

For SQE1, you are required to understand trial procedure in magistrates' court and Crown Court and the solicitor’s duty to the court, with a focus on the following syllabus points:

• Procedural sequence and distinctive features of trial in both magistrates' court and Crown Court, including allocation, plea before venue, and empanelment of a jury.
• Solicitor’s professional duty to the court: honesty, integrity, and the prohibition on deceiving or misleading the court.
• Recognition and management of conflicts arising between duty to client and duty to court, including application of SRA Code of Conduct and how these impact trial conduct (e.g., when instructed to present false evidence, or in co-defendant matters).
• Courtroom etiquette: appropriate forms of address for the bench, witnesses and other advocates, as well as expected standards of behaviour.
• The law and procedures surrounding the submission of no case to answer, evidence presentation, and the differences between leading and non-leading questions in examination-in-chief, cross-examination, and re-examination.
• Process and grounds for withdrawal from acting, including reasons for doing so and the handling of client confidentiality.

Test Your Knowledge

Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, remember to look more closely at that area during your revision.

1. What is the primary duty of a solicitor to the court during a criminal trial?
2. When must a solicitor withdraw from acting for a client during trial?
3. What are the main differences in trial procedure between magistrates' court and Crown Court?
4. How should a solicitor respond if a client instructs them to present evidence the solicitor knows is false?

Introduction

A clear understanding of criminal trial procedure and ethical responsibilities is essential for effective legal practice, as well as the SQE1 assessment. Trials in magistrates' court (for summary-only or less serious either-way offences) differ significantly from those in Crown Court (where more serious matters are tried before a judge and jury), not just in format but in roles and professional duties. Crucially, solicitors must understand how their obligations to advance their client’s case are limited by an overarching duty to the court—to act honestly, with integrity, and not to mislead. This duty regularly arises in the conduct of litigation, in court submissions, in handling evidence, and when professional conflicts occur, and is fundamental to upholding the proper administration of justice.

Key Term: actus reus
The physical element of a criminal offence; the conduct, act, or omission required by the definition of the crime.

Key Term: mens rea
The mental element of a criminal offence, such as intention, recklessness, knowledge, or, in rarer instances, negligence.

Trial Procedure in Magistrates' Court

Magistrates’ courts handle summary-only and many either-way offences, acting as the first instance for all criminal matters. Hearings are before a district judge or a bench of up to three lay magistrates, advised on points of law by a legal advisor. For either-way offences, the allocation procedure and plea before venue process determine whether the matter remains with the magistrates or is sent to the Crown Court.

Main Stages of a Magistrates' Court Trial

• Opening Speech by Prosecution:
  The prosecution opens the case, outlining the relevant law, summarising the evidence, and stating the matters that are likely to be in dispute. The defence generally does not make an opening speech unless specifically permitted. If the defendant is unrepresented, the court may permit a short opening to identify issues.

• Prosecution Evidence:
  Witnesses are called by the prosecution. Each is subjected to examination-in-chief, cross-examination, and if appropriate, re-examination. All evidence, including witness statements, documents, and exhibits, must comply with the rules of admissibility, and may be challenged on grounds such as hearsay or bad character. Magistrates rule on admissibility and then must disregard excluded evidence when deciding facts.

• Submission of No Case to Answer:
  At the close of the prosecution’s case, the defence may make this submission if it is believed no reasonable tribunal of fact could properly convict. The test, following R v Galbraith, is whether there is evidence on which a tribunal could properly convict. If there is none, or the evidence is so weak it would be unsafe, the court must direct an acquittal.

Key Term: submission of no case to answer
A legal submission made by the defence at the end of the prosecution's case, contending that the prosecution has failed to establish a prima facie case to answer. If successful, an acquittal is directed.

• Defence Evidence:
  If the case continues, the defence may call evidence, beginning with the defendant if they choose to give evidence. The same rules of examination, cross-examination, and re-examination apply (see below for definitions). A defendant is not compellable for the defence, but may choose to give evidence. If a defendant elects not to testify, s 35 CJPOA 1994 adverse inferences may be available subject to proper direction.

• Closing Speeches:
  Closing speeches are generally made by the defence and, if evidence has been called by the defence, by the prosecution. The closing speech will highlight the strengths of their own case and the weaknesses in the opposing case. Where the defendant is unrepresented and has called no evidence, the prosecutor will not ordinarily have a right to a closing speech.

• Verdict:
  Magistrates retire to deliberate and deliver a verdict which may be accompanied by brief reasons. Verdicts may be by unanimity; in a lay bench, majority decisions of the bench are permitted but not announced as such. If the defendant is acquitted, they are discharged; if convicted, the matter proceeds to sentence.

• Sentencing:
  The court will sentence immediately if possible, or may adjourn for reports (e.g., pre-sentence, medical, or probation reports). Maximum sentencing powers are limited, but the court may commit for sentence to the Crown Court if powers are insufficient.

Further practical points:

• The prosecutor’s case is proved “so that the court is sure.” The correct direction is to the criminal standard; avoid using “beyond reasonable doubt” in submissions; modern practice is to use “sure.”
• The legal adviser records case management decisions on the Preparation for Effective Trial (PET) form and assists the bench with directions and legal rulings.
• The prosecution should call witnesses in logical order; where s 9 CJA 1967 statements are unchallenged, they may be read with consent to save court time.

Trial Procedure in Crown Court

Crown Court deals with indictable-only and the most serious either-way offences. The trial is before a judge (who rules on law and admissibility) and a jury (who determine the facts). This separation of roles ensures that jurors are not prejudiced by the consideration of inadmissible evidence.

Main Stages of a Crown Court Trial

• Jury Empanelment:
  A jury of 12 is sworn in, subject to rules of competence and compellability. Jurors swear or affirm to try the case according to the evidence. Rare challenges may be made (for example, “stand by” for the Crown), but they are exceptional.

• Arraignment:
  The defendant is called to the dock and asked to enter a plea to each count on the indictment. If a guilty plea is entered, the court proceeds to sentence (immediately or after reports). If a not‑guilty plea is entered, trial proceeds.

• Opening Speech by Prosecution:
  The prosecution outlines the law, summarises the anticipated evidence, and explains the issues that the jury will need to resolve. A clear, neutral chronology helps the jury follow the evidence.

• Prosecution Evidence:
  Witnesses and documentary/real exhibits are presented. Evidence is introduced through examination-in-chief, cross-examination, and re-examination (see below). Arguments as to admissibility (e.g., confessions under PACE s 76, exclusion under s 78, hearsay, or bad character) are ruled on by the judge—often in a voir dire (a trial within a trial where the jury is excluded).

• Submission of No Case to Answer:
  After the prosecution case, the defence may submit to the judge that the case ought not to proceed if there is no evidence on which a properly directed jury could convict. If granted, the judge directs a not‑guilty verdict. If refused, the defence case follows.

• Defence Case:
  If the submission fails, the defence may call the defendant (who is not compellable but may give evidence) and any other witnesses. The defence may make an opening speech if they will call a witness other than the defendant. Cross‑examination may be robust but must be fair; the court will control improper questioning.

• Closing Speeches:
  Both prosecution and defence advocates summarise evidence and law, drawing attention to strengths, weaknesses, and matters of credibility. Counsel should not express personal opinions or refer to matters not in evidence.

• Judge's Summing Up:
  The judge presents the law and outlines the evidence relevant to the legal issues to the jury, directing them on what to consider and the standard of proof. In appropriate cases, directions include identification (Turnbull), good character, lies (Lucas), drawing of adverse inferences, and careful handling of hearsay and expert evidence.

• Jury Deliberation and Verdict:
  The jury retires to consider its verdict. A unanimous verdict is sought. After at least two hours and ten minutes deliberation, a majority verdict may be accepted (e.g., 10–2 or 11–1 depending on the number of jurors remaining).

• Sentencing:
  If convicted, the judge proceeds to sentence; pre-sentence reports or victim statements may inform this process.

Key Term: voir dire
A hearing conducted in the absence of the jury to determine the admissibility of contested evidence, such as confessions or identification.

Key Term: examination-in-chief
The initial questioning of a witness by the party who called them, intended to elicit their evidence in their own words; leading questions are generally not permitted.

Key Term: cross-examination
The questioning of a witness by the opposing party, aimed at testing the truthfulness, reliability, or consistency of their evidence; leading questions are permitted.

Key Term: re-examination
The follow-up questioning by the original party, limited to matters arising from cross-examination, intended to clarify or challenge points raised.

Key Term: route to verdict
An ordered set of questions or directions provided by the judge to guide the jury in logically considering each element of the offence and applying the evidence to reach a verdict in accordance with the law.

Practical points for trial advocates:

• Identify the real issues early (CrimPR overriding objective). Ensure disclosure and case management directions are complied with.
• Where identification is in issue, expect a Turnbull direction. Assist the judge by proposing an accurate route to verdict reflecting the elements and defences in play.
• The right to a closing speech depends on whether the party has called evidence (in the Crown Court both sides usually do; in the magistrates’ court the prosecutor may lose the right if the defence calls none).

The Solicitor's Duty to the Court

Solicitors, as officers of the court, are bound to uphold the rule of law and proper administration of justice. While the solicitor owes a duty of loyalty and care to the client, the duty to the court is overriding and can override obligations owed to the client if those obligations come into conflict. This is enshrined in the SRA Principles and Code of Conduct.

Key Term: duty to the court
The obligation imposed on a solicitor to act with honesty, integrity, and independence, and never mislead the court, even where this may conflict with client interest.

Key Term: misleading the court
Any act or omission by which the court is deceived—intentionally or recklessly—including making false statements, failing to correct a misleading impression, or presenting evidence known to be false.

Honesty, Integrity, and Independence

Solicitors must not knowingly or recklessly mislead the court. This encompasses all forms of representation, including written and oral submissions, affidavits, witness statements, and any material intended for the court. Presenting false evidence or making inaccurate legal submissions constitutes a breach of this duty and may be professional misconduct or contempt of court.

The duty includes:

• Correcting inadvertent errors or misleading impressions as soon as they are identified.
• Citing relevant law fairly, including authorities that are adverse where failure to do so would mislead.
• Not advancing points that are not properly arguable.
• Not aiding perjury or “coaching” a witness to give deceptive evidence (proofing witnesses is proper; rehearsal of deceptive answers is not).

Handling Conflicts Between Duties

Conflicts may arise where the client instructs the solicitor to act in a manner inconsistent with the solicitor’s duty to the court, such as:

• Presenting evidence the solicitor knows or believes to be false.
• Calling a witness whom the solicitor knows will lie.
• Failing to disclose a material fact when required by law or procedure.
• Advancing a positive defence the solicitor knows to be untrue.

In such cases, the solicitor must not act on those instructions. The proper response is to:

• Advise the client of the conflict and consequences.
• Refuse to carry out instructions that would mislead the court.
• Consider withdrawal if the client insists on pursuing the improper course.

A solicitor cannot, for example, submit an alibi they know is fabricated, nor can they allow a client to give evidence that they know is untrue. If withdrawal is necessary, the solicitor must not compromise client confidentiality—simply withdraw, citing "professional reasons." The solicitor should not disclose the reason for withdrawal.

Key Term: conflict of interest
A situation where a solicitor’s duty to the court and their duty to the client are incompatible, or where acting for multiple clients would risk a breach of confidence or divided loyalty.

Key Term: withdrawal from acting
Ceasing to represent the client, usually due to an ethical or professional conflict (e.g., where the client insists on misleading the court or where there is an irresolvable conflict between co-defendants).

Confidentiality and Disclosure

Solicitors’ duty of confidentiality to clients is longstanding and fundamental but is subject to exceptions, most notably where continuing to act would involve misleading the court. Where withdrawal from the case is required, solicitors must not provide details to the court, other parties, or even co-defendants about the reason, in order to protect client privacy. Legal professional privilege belongs to the client; disclosure without informed consent should not occur unless compelled by law (e.g., a court order) or a recognised exception (such as preventing the commission of a serious crime) applies. Even when withdrawing, the solicitor should continue to preserve privilege and confidentiality.

Assisting the Court on Law and Procedure

The duty to the court requires:

• Drawing the judge’s attention to relevant statutory provisions and binding case law, including where adverse to the client’s position, if failure to do so would mislead.
• Identifying procedural irregularities affecting trial fairness (e.g., non‑compliance with CrimPR, improper service of evidence).
• In ex parte applications (rare in crime), full and frank disclosure of material facts.

Multiple Clients and Co-defendants

Acting for more than one client (e.g., co-defendants) can present serious risks if defences conflict or may become so. Solicitors must:

• Evaluate at the outset whether there is a significant risk of conflict; if so, refuse joint retainer.
• Keep the risk under review; a later divergence of accounts can trigger the need to cease acting for one or both.
• Never use confidential information from one client for the benefit of another without informed consent.
• Recognise that “information barriers” are rarely workable in criminal practice within a single small team.

Courtroom Conduct and Etiquette

Proper courtroom conduct underlines the integrity of proceedings. Solicitors must:

• Use correct forms of address: “Your Worships” (lay magistrates), “Sir/Madam” (District Judge), “Your Honour” (Crown Court judge).
• Stand when addressing the bench; bow upon entry and exit.
• Address fellow advocates as “my friend” (solicitor) or “my learned friend” (barrister).
• Dress and behave with formality and respect; avoid emotive or improper submissions.
• Avoid interruptions; ensure only one advocate is on their feet at a time.
• Never communicate with jurors or attempt to influence witnesses improperly.
• Not confer with a witness about their evidence while that witness is under cross‑examination unless the court permits (seek guidance where necessary).
• Comply with CrimPR case management directions and assist the court to deal with cases justly.

Breaches of etiquette or professional conduct—such as knowingly misleading the court, contacting jurors, or failing to disclose known relevant law or irregularities—can result in disciplinary action or, in serious cases, findings of contempt of court.

Ethical Dilemmas in Practice

Solicitors regularly face difficult situations where the client's interests and instructions may conflict with the rules of professional conduct or the duty to the court. Careful analysis of these situations, guided by the SRA Code and established professional rules, is essential. The following examples illustrate appropriate handling:

Worked Example 1.1

A client admits guilt to their solicitor but decides to plead not guilty, instructing the solicitor to advance a false alibi as the defence.

Answer:
The solicitor cannot present evidence known to be false. They must advise the client of the impossibility of relying on a fabricated alibi. If the client insists on pursuing this course, the solicitor should withdraw from acting, stating "for professional reasons" and without revealing the client’s admission. The solicitor may, however, continue to put the prosecution to proof, ensuring that they do not present misrepresentations or call evidence known to be untrue.

Worked Example 1.2

During a trial, a client hands their solicitor a document which seriously incriminates them and asks the solicitor to destroy or withhold it from the court.

Answer:
The solicitor must not agree to destroy or conceal evidence. Deliberate destruction or suppression of evidence can be a criminal offence (perverting the course of justice) and a serious breach of professional rules. The solicitor must preserve the document, comply with disclosure obligations if ordered, and may need to withdraw from acting if continuing would involve breaching their duty.

Worked Example 1.3

You are asked to act for two co-defendants charged with aggravated assault. During consultation, it becomes clear each client blames the other.

Answer:
Representing both in such circumstances would lead to a significant risk of conflict. The solicitor must refuse or cease to act for more than one, ensuring that any confidential information from one client is not used to the detriment of the other, maintaining the integrity of each client’s case and avoiding compromise of the duty to the court. Exam Warning:
A solicitor who intentionally misleads a court or is complicit in the presentation of false evidence may face findings of contempt of court, disciplinary sanctions from the SRA, or even criminal prosecution. Revision Tip:
The solicitor's ultimate duty is to uphold the integrity of the judicial process; when this conflicts irreconcilably with the best interests of an individual client, the duty to the court prevails.

Worked Example 1.4

At trial, the judge inadvertently applies the wrong legal test in a direction favourable to your client. Your opponent does not notice.

Answer:
If the court would be misled or the direction risks an unsafe verdict, the duty to the court requires the advocate to draw the error to the judge’s attention, even if adverse to the client. The proper course is to raise the issue respectfully, citing the correct authority. The client’s interests are served by a fair trial and legally sound verdict.

Leading and Non-Leading Questions

Key Term: leading question
A question which suggests its own answer, generally permitted only in cross‑examination. For example, “You saw the defendant at the scene, didn't you?”

Key Term: non-leading question
An open-ended question which does not suggest an answer. These are required in examination‑in‑chief, for instance, “Where were you at the time of the incident?”

During examination-in-chief and re-examination, advocates should avoid leading questions, except in matters not in dispute (such as the witness’s name), when refreshing memory, or where the witness has been declared hostile. Cross-examination, by contrast, is designed to test credibility, so leading questions are the norm. In re‑examination, confine questions to matters arising from cross‑examination; do not introduce new topics unless fairness requires and the court permits.

Submissions of No Case to Answer: Practical Detail

In both courts the Galbraith test applies:

• If there is no evidence of an essential element, the case must be stopped.
• Where there is some evidence but it is tenuous or inherently weak, the judge must consider whether, taken at its highest, it is such that a properly directed jury could convict. If not, the case is stopped.
• If the strength or weakness of the case turns on the view of witness reliability, the case should ordinarily go to the fact‑finder.

In certain offences (e.g., murder, manslaughter, attempted murder, and some specified Road Traffic Act offences), a no‑case submission may only be made after the defence evidence has been heard.

Examination Tactics and Ethical Boundaries

• Do not put to a witness an allegation you have no instructions to support and no reasonable basis to suggest.
• If you positively assert a fact (e.g., “My client was in Leeds”), you should be ready to call evidence capable of supporting it.
• You may test a witness’s account robustly, but personal abuse, harassment, or irrelevant disparagement is improper.
• Do not ask a question you know to be improper merely to plant a suggestion before the tribunal.

Summary

Key Point Checklist

This article has covered the following key knowledge points:

• The structure and main stages of trials in both magistrates' court and Crown Court, with attention to the separation of functions and procedural details.
• The duty of the solicitor to the court, prioritising honesty, integrity, and the prohibition on misleading the tribunal.
• The rules for addressing and resolving conflicts between duties to the client and duties to the court, including the appropriate steps when instructed to mislead the court.
• The correct professional response to situations requiring withdrawal from acting, especially in cases involving false evidence or irreconcilable conflicts.
• Proper courtroom conduct and etiquette, including correct modes of address and behaviour toward the bench, witnesses, and fellow advocates.
• The differences between leading and non-leading questions and their procedural context (chief, cross and re‑examination), including hostile witnesses.
• How to manage the risk of professional misconduct or contempt when faced with ethical dilemmas; the importance of correcting errors and assisting the court on law.
• The Galbraith test and the practical effect of a submission of no case to answer in both courts, including timing limitations for certain offences.
• Practical features of Crown Court trials: voir dire, summing‑up, route to verdict, and majority verdicts.

Key Terms and Concepts

• actus reus
• mens rea
• duty to the court
• misleading the court
• conflict of interest
• withdrawal from acting
• submission of no case to answer
• voir dire
• examination-in-chief
• cross-examination
• re-examination
• leading question
• non-leading question
• route to verdict

Key Term: submission of no case to answer
A legal submission made by the defence at the end of the prosecution's case, contending that the prosecution has failed to establish a prima facie case to answer. If successful, an acquittal is directed.

Key Term: voir dire
A hearing conducted in the absence of the jury to determine the admissibility of contested evidence, such as confessions or identification.

Key Term: examination-in-chief
The initial questioning of a witness by the party who called them, intended to elicit their evidence in their own words; leading questions are generally not permitted.

Key Term: cross-examination
The questioning of a witness by the opposing party, aimed at testing the truthfulness, reliability, or consistency of their evidence; leading questions are permitted.

Key Term: re-examination
The follow-up questioning by the original party, limited to matters arising from cross-examination, intended to clarify or challenge points raised.

Key Term: leading question
A question which suggests its own answer, generally permitted only in cross‑examination. For example, “You saw the defendant at the scene, didn't you?”

Key Term: non-leading question
An open-ended question which does not suggest an answer. These are required in examination‑in‑chief, for instance, “Where were you at the time of the incident?”

Key Term: route to verdict
An ordered set of questions or directions provided by the judge to guide the jury in logically considering each element of the offence and applying the evidence to reach a verdict in accordance with the law.

Key Term: duty to the court
The obligation imposed on a solicitor to act with honesty, integrity, and independence, and never mislead the court, even where this may conflict with client interest.

Key Term: misleading the court
Any act or omission by which the court is deceived—intentionally or recklessly—including making false statements, failing to correct a misleading impression, or presenting evidence known to be false.

Key Term: conflict of interest
A situation where a solicitor’s duty to the court and their duty to the client are incompatible, or where acting for multiple clients would risk a breach of confidence or divided loyalty.

Key Term: withdrawal from acting
Ceasing to represent the client, usually due to an ethical or professional conflict (e.g., where the client insists on misleading the court or where there is an irresolvable conflict between co-defendants).

Key Term: actus reus
The physical element of a criminal offence; the conduct, act, or omission required by the definition of the crime.

Key Term: mens rea
The mental element of a criminal offence, such as intention, recklessness, knowledge, or, in rarer instances, negligence.