Umar Azmeh Comments On Overwhelming Supervening Act: R V Grant [2021] EWCA Crim 1243 In The Criminal Law Review – Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration


Umar Azmeh Comments On Overwhelming Supervening Act: R V Grant [2021] EWCA Crim 1243 In The Criminal Law Review

To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on

BCL associate Umar Azmeh’s case comment
on Overwhelming supervening act: R v Grant (Tony Lee) [2021]
EWCA Crim. 1243
has been published in the latest edition of
the Criminal Law Review.

*Here is a short extract from the article:

The February 2022 edition of Criminal Law Review carries Umar
Azmeh’s case comment on R v Grant (Tony Lee) [2021]
EWCA Crim. 1243 which concerned the question of whether the trial
judge erred in refusing to give the jury a direction on a potential
overwhelming supervening act where the principal’s act of using
his car to run over and kill the victim departed from the agreed
plan between the principal and Grant to attack the victim and cause
grievous bodily harm.

Having gone in a vehicle to find the victim, and with Grant in
the front passenger seat – the plan being to set upon the
victim with weapons – the principal drove the car into the
victim, killing him instantly. It was argued at trial that the
principal’s action of driving the car into the victim and
killing him was such a departure from the agreed plan, which was to
inflict grievous bodily harm upon the victim using weapons carried
in the car, that it ought to constitute an overwhelming supervening
act therefore leaving it open to the jury to find Grant guilty of
manslaughter rather than murder. The judge was unimpressed with
this argument and refused to leave the question to the jury, with
Grant appealing this decision.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding inter alia,
that the core question whether Grant’s conduct was “so
distanced in time place or circumstances from the conduct of the
perpetrator that it would not be realistic to regard his or her
offence as encouraged or assisted by it
” (R v
[2016] UKSC 8; [2017] AC 387). In this case, that high
bar had not been met.

Umar’s article analyses the Court of Appeal’s decision,
and discusses the considerations relevant to the degree of
departure required from a joint enterprise

*This article was first published by Thomson Reuters in February
2022. If you wish to read the full article, please visit Thomson
Reuters Westlaw website.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.

POPULAR ARTICLES ON: Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration from UK

In Pursuit Of Protection


The precise role of a protector in relation to discretionary trusts has been difficult to identify and there was, until recently, little judicial authority on the nature of a protector’s duties particularly…

Next Post

Biden administration proposes limiting consideration of public benefits for green card applications

The Biden administration on Thursday proposed new regulations that would limit the number of public benefits that can weigh against immigrants applying for permanent U.S. residency, or green cards.  Under the proposal, U.S. immigration caseworkers would only consider participation in income assistance programs like Supplemental Security Income and Temporary Assistance […]