This guide is maintained as a current resource for September 2026 and covers only the laws of England and Wales. Information is for general guidance, not legal advice. Consult a qualified solicitor for advice specific to your situation.
A comprehensive guide on how appeals and reviews are handled in England and Wales where prosecutorial decision‑making or conduct is challenged, including victims' rights to review, defence appeals on misconduct grounds, judicial review and the role of the CCRC.
In the criminal justice system of England and Wales, prosecutors - most commonly the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) - play a central role in bringing charges and presenting the case against defendants. Prosecutorial decisions and conduct are governed by statutory frameworks and professional standards, and when misconduct or questionable prosecutorial decisions occur, there are legal processes through which those actions can be reviewed or challenged. This article explains how appeals and reviews work in the context of alleged misconduct by the prosecution, including rights, procedures, time limits and practical considerations for affected parties.
What Is Prosecutorial Misconduct?
“Prosecutorial misconduct” refers to improper or unlawful actions by prosecutors that prejudice the fairness of proceedings or violate legal or ethical standards. Examples may include:
- Failing to disclose evidence that favours the defence.
- Presenting false or misleading evidence.
- Abusing prosecutorial discretion by proceeding with charges that lack a legal basis.
- Acting in bad faith during investigations or at trial.
Such misconduct is generally handled through legal safeguards and review mechanisms, rather than through direct “appeals” against prosecution conduct in the same way that defendants appeal convictions.
Reviewing Prosecutorial Decisions Before Trial
Victims' Right to Review Decisions Not to Prosecute
Where the CPS decides not to bring charges or to discontinue a prosecution, victims can request an internal review through the Victims' Right to Review (VRR) scheme. This process allows victims to ask the CPS to re‑examine a decision not to prosecute or to stop proceedings, usually on the basis that the initial decision was incorrect in law, fact or application of the Code for Crown Prosecutors.
This is not an appeal in the strict judicial sense, but it is a formal internal review process that gives victims and the public oversight of prosecutorial decision‑making.
Appeals Involving Prosecutorial Actions During or After Trial
Appeals by the Defence Alleging Misconduct
Defendants do not directly “appeal the prosecution” itself; instead, concerns about prosecutorial misconduct are typically raised as grounds for appealing a conviction or sentence. A conviction is reviewed by the Court of Appeal Criminal Division where the appellant argues that misconduct by the prosecution contributed to an unsafe conviction, for example because crucial evidence was not disclosed or a prosecutor acted improperly in court.
The appeal process focuses on whether the conviction or sentence is unsafe as a result of legal or procedural error, including misconduct (for example, a failure to disclose exculpatory evidence). The Court of Appeal may allow such appeals and quash convictions where misconduct has undermined fairness.
Prosecution Appeals on Points of Law
The CPS itself has rights of appeal in limited circumstances. Under section 58 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, the prosecution may appeal certain judicial rulings - such as terminating rulings made during trial that effectively end the case - to the Court of Appeal. This right is restricted and requires careful authorisation, because a failed prosecution appeal can lead to an acquittal.
These prosecution appeals are not directly about misconduct by prosecutors but are mechanisms for correcting judicial errors that affect the prosecution's ability to pursue a case.
Judicial Review of CPS Decisions
Where an individual believes that a prosecutorial decision is unlawful - for example a decision to prosecute that is an abuse of process, irrational, or made without proper consideration of legal duties - judicial review in the High Court may be available. Judicial review is a public law remedy: it examines the lawfulness of a decision‑maker's actions rather than the merits of a particular criminal case.
A successful judicial review claim can lead to a decision being quashed and remitted for reconsideration. Keep in mind that judicial review is separate from the ordinary appeal process against conviction or sentence.
Role of the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC)
After all normal appeal routes have been exhausted, and where significant issues remain - such as undisclosed evidence that could indicate prosecutorial misconduct - the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) can independently investigate and, if appropriate, refer a case back to the Court of Appeal. The CCRC operates as the official body tasked with addressing miscarriages of justice arising from trials, including those where prosecutorial conduct may have contributed to an unsafe conviction.
The CCRC's powers include obtaining documents from public bodies and reviewing complex matters before deciding whether to refer a case.
Time Limits and Practical Considerations
- Appeals against conviction or sentence must generally be lodged within 28 days of the relevant decision. Extensions may be granted in exceptional circumstances.
- Judicial review typically requires prompt action and must meet procedural requirements for permission.
- Requests under VRR schemes are governed by CPS guidance and are not subject to court deadlines, but timely submission improves prospects of effective review.
Appellants should clearly articulate how prosecutorial conduct affected legal rights or trial fairness, and reference relevant law and procedural rules.
Key Takeaways
Allegations of prosecutorial misconduct in England and Wales are addressed through a combination of legal remedies and review mechanisms:
- Internal reviews (such as the Victims' Right to Review) allow examination of prosecutorial decisions before trial or during case progression.
- Appeals by defendants may raise prosecutorial misconduct as a ground for arguing that a conviction is unsafe.
- Prosecution appeals under statute enable the CPS to challenge certain judicial rulings, though these relate to legal decisions rather than misconduct.
- Judicial review provides a route to challenge unlawful prosecutorial decisions in the High Court.
- The Criminal Cases Review Commission can investigate and refer matters to the Court of Appeal where misconduct contributed to injustice.
Understanding these processes helps ensure that prosecutorial decisions and conduct remain fair, lawful and subject to oversight - safeguarding public confidence in the justice system.
