The Court of Appeal's refusal to hear an appeal in a serious criminal case
Supreme Court order 21 October 2021, HR-2021-2058-A, (case no. 21-096814STR-HRET), criminal case, appeal against decision.
A (Counsel Frode Sulland), The Norwegian Bar Association (intervener) (Counsel Halvard Helle) v. The Public Prosecution Authority (Counsel Mads Fredrik Baardseth)
Justices: Skoghøy, Normann, Noer, Bergh, Thyness
The Court of Appeal had refused to hear the defendant's appeal against a conviction in rape case, see section 321 subsection 2 of the Criminal Procedure Act. The Supreme Court, having conducted an oral hearing, carried out a thorough assessment of the strict conditions for disallowing an appeal under this provision, including the requirement of clarity and the requirement that it must be sufficient to resolve the legal and evidentiary issues based on a simplified written procedure. It was stated that there was reason to lay down strict requirements for the Court of Appeal's reasoning in the most serious cases, and that section 321 subsection 2 of the Criminal Procedure Act would not be contrary to Article 6 (1) ECHR if the strict conditions under the provision were met. In the individual assessment, the Supreme Court attached great importance to the inconsistencies between the defendant's and the aggrieved person's statements, pointed to the fact that the conviction largely relied on the assessment of the credibility of these statements, and stated that the only appropriate way to carry out a substantive review was through an oral appeal hearing. The Court of Appeal's decision was set aside.