This book examines the decision-making of the Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, of England and Wales in appeals against conviction through the lens of risk. This is achieved by normative evaluation of the concept of risk and how it is tolerated within the wider criminal justice system, and the implications of that tolerance for the Court of Appeal. This analysis involves consideration of recent Court decisions to further our understanding of its decision-making process, to advance the normative framework in this context, and to provide empirical support for the arguments presented. Ultimately the book argues that since the risk of injustice is tolerated elsewhere, there must exist a residual tolerance for injustice in the appeal system. The work makes a significant theoretical contribution to discourse on criminal appeals by linking the unsafety test to the general problem of uncertainty and risk-taking. By doing so, it offers an insightful take on the purposes of criminal appeals and addresses concerns about decision-making in the Court of Appeal. The study will be of interest to academics, researchers and practitioners working in the areas of criminal law and justice, studies related to miscarriages of justice, judicial decision-making and criminology.

Paul Dargue is an Assistant Professor at Northumbria University School of Law, Northumbria University, UK. His research interests are in criminal law, criminal evidence, the criminal appeal system, and public law.