Adult either-way cases: plea before venue, allocation, indication and election

Plea before venue: decide whether there will be a contested trial to allocate

Plea before venue is the statutory process for an ordinary adult either-way case, under MCA s 17A and CrimPR rr 9.8–9.9. Exclude mandatory or related sending and the separate shoplifting route first. For a qualifying criminal-damage charge, take and explain the initial indication under r 9.8; if there is no guilty indication, r 9.10 then places the statutory value procedure before ordinary allocation. The explanation below concerns the ordinary adult branch once the applicable special routes have been addressed. The court reads the written allegation, explains it in terms the defendant understands, and explains the consequences before asking whether the defendant would plead guilty if the matter proceeded to trial.

A guilty indication has immediate legal significance: the court deals with it as a guilty plea in summary proceedings, resulting in conviction. The next task is sentence in the magistrates' court or a lawful committal for sentence. There is no allocation of a contested trial and no jury election after that conviction merely because the defendant would prefer a different sentencing court.

For the ordinary branch, a not-guilty indication, or no indication, leads to allocation; a qualifying criminal-damage case first passes through the value procedure just described. The absence of an indication is not a guilty plea. It is also not yet an election of Crown Court trial. Keep that consequence separate from a later failure to consent to summary trial under s 20: the procedural question being asked has changed. MCA ss 17A–18; CrimPR rr 9.8–9.9.

Worked contrast — Amina. Amina is charged with assault occasioning actual bodily harm. She admits pushing the complainant but says she used necessary force to defend herself. That account does not justify treating her as having admitted the offence. After informed advice, a not-guilty indication takes the ordinary charge to allocation. If instead she admits all elements and gives a guilty indication, the court moves to conviction and sentence, not to asking whether she wants a jury.

Allocation: the court decides suitability before the adult chooses

Allocation under MCA s 19 is the court's decision whether summary trial or trial on indictment is more suitable. It is not a finding of guilt. The prosecution may provide the defendant's record and make submissions; the defence also makes submissions. The court assesses its sentencing powers, the alleged facts and relevant defence points, and the applicable allocation and offence guidelines.

The starting approach is summary trial unless the likely outcome would clearly exceed the magistrates' powers after relevant mitigation and potential guilty-plea reduction, or unusual legal, procedural or factual complexity calls for Crown Court trial. A contested case is not “unusually complex” merely because witnesses disagree. Equally, the court should not pretend that an obviously serious case fits its powers by ignoring the alleged harm. In a straightforward case, the later power to commit for sentence is relevant and can support retention even where the eventual sentence may exceed summary powers. MCA s 19; Allocation and committal for sentence guideline, ‘Venue for trial’, paragraphs 1–4.

For one ordinary either-way offence, the general magistrates' imprisonment limit is currently twelve months, following SI 2024/1067 from 18 November 2024. Check the specific offence maximum, the relevant statutory conditions and any special limitation: the general power does not turn every summary offence into a twelve-month offence or override s 22 damage limits. For several charges, consider the lawful aggregate powers for the actual combination rather than multiplying twelve months by the number of counts. Sentencing Act 2020 s 224; SI 2024/1067 regs 1–2.

Practical submissions. In Amina's case, the defence can identify the alleged injury, the disputed role, any properly raised mitigation and why the case is manageable in a summary trial. It should not promise an acquittal or ask the court to determine credibility at allocation. The prosecutor should identify why the specific facts, rather than the offence name alone, demand greater powers or exceptional procedure.

If the court decides that Crown Court trial is appropriate, it sends the case. The defendant cannot force summary trial. If it accepts summary jurisdiction, it explains the adult's choice and that conviction after a summary trial or a later guilty plea may still lead to committal for sentence. Acceptance is not a promise of a particular sentence and not a guarantee that the offender can never be sentenced in the Crown Court.

The limited sentence indication comes after summary allocation

After deciding that summary trial is suitable and before asking for final consent to it, the magistrates explain the possible sentence indication under MCA s 20. The defendant may ask whether a guilty plea at that stage would be more likely to receive a custodial or a non-custodial sentence. The court may decline to indicate. It does not supply a negotiated sentence or promise a particular number of months. Refusal to indicate is not evidence of guilt and should not be presented as punishment for requesting one. MCA ss 20–20A; CrimPR r 9.11.

The order matters:

Where the court indicates a non-custodial sentence and the defendant then gives the guilty indication contemplated by the statute, s 20A normally prevents a custodial sentence for that offence, subject to the express statutory exceptions below. A suspended custodial sentence is still a custodial sentence, not a non-custodial disposal merely because prison is not entered immediately. Conversely, if the defendant does not plead guilty at the relevant stage, the earlier indication is not a standing guarantee for a later plea or conviction. An indication that custody is more likely is not a fixed custodial term. MCA s 20A; CrimPR r 9.11.

Limits of that protection. MCA s 20A(2) preserves Sentencing Code ss 15(4), 18(8) and 21(6). The magistrates can still use the statutory dangerous-offender or related-offence committal machinery notwithstanding the indication. For a legally specified offence, s 21(6) removes the Crown Court's non-custody restriction where committal is under s 15, or under s 18 with the required statement that s 15 committal was also available. “Specified” means within the statutory offence list; “dangerous” is a separate statutory sentencing assessment, not a label for an unpleasant allegation. Those gateways and assessments belong to the sentencing chapter. An ordinary change of sentencing court is not, by itself, an escape from a binding indication. MCA s 20A(1)–(3); Sentencing Code ss 15(4), 18(8), 21(6).

A Goodyear indicationGlossary termGoodyear indication is different: in the Crown Court, the defendant may request an indication of the maximum sentence on an immediate guilty plea on the identified factual basis, subject to the applicable safeguards. It is not the magistrates' binary custodial/non-custodial question and it is not a private plea bargain. Do not put a Crown Court maximum-sentence request into the pre-allocation stage of an adult magistrates' case. The detailed Goodyear procedure and disputed factual basis belong to the sentencing chapter. CrimPR r 3.31; R v Goodyear [2005] EWCA Crim 888.

Worked contrast. Amina obtains a non-custodial indication after summary allocation and gives the requisite guilty indication then: in the ordinary case, outside the statutory committal exceptions, the protection applies. If she maintains her denial, is tried and convicted, that earlier indication does not guarantee a non-custodial outcome. In neither version was the court required to offer the indication before deciding whether summary trial was suitable.

Election: the adult's choice is not the court's allocation decision

Once summary trial has been found suitable, an adult may consent to it or exercise the right to elect Crown Court trialGlossary termElection for Crown Court trial. If the defendant consents, the case proceeds to summary trial. If the defendant refuses or does not answer the consent question, the court sends the case for Crown Court trial. That is why “no answer” can have different effects at two stages: no plea indication leads to allocation; no consent after summary allocation leads to sending. MCA ss 20–21; CrimPR rr 9.11 and 9.14.

Advice should make the choice concrete. Explain who decides disputed facts in each forum, the nature of the evidence and legal issues, participation needs, likely preparation and listing implications, funding and costs, and the possible sentencing routes. A jury is not a promise of better odds. Speed is not a substitute for fairness. Summary trial is not a guarantee against later committal for sentence. Base any case-specific advice on evidence and instructions, not folklore about a particular bench or jury.

The adult's preference expressed before allocation can be recorded, but it does not reverse the current statutory sequence. Conversely, an adult's willingness to stay cannot veto the court's lawful decision that Crown Court trial is more suitable. The defendant chooses only within the choice the law actually provides.

Can the summary route change later?

Before a summary trial begins, the prosecutor may apply under MCA s 25 and CrimPR r 9.12 for Crown Court trial. The court must be satisfied that its sentencing powers would be inadequate. It determines that application before other pre-trial applications. Newly clarified aggravating facts may explain the application, but do not invent an additional universal statutory requirement that every application must be based on newly discovered evidence. The controlling condition is inadequacy under s 25(2B), together with the procedural requirements. MCA s 25; CrimPR r 9.12.

After a valid conviction, the appropriate question is a lawful committal for sentence, not a fresh sending for trial on the same conviction. That boundary is developed in section 5. A child does not acquire this entire adult sequence: the youth plea and forum procedure under r 9.13 has its own indication timing and no adult right of election. Cross-refer to Chapter 13 (Youth Court, Remand, Sentencing, Legal Aid and Welsh Language) instead of copying adult rules into a youth fact pattern.

Existing linked practice. The links to FLK2-CL-PBV-007 and Q001, and to cl-fc-04, cl-fc-05, cl-fc-12 and cl-fc-13, are retained in this section exactly as supplied. Q001's subject is mandatory sending; the hospital/absence distinction in FLK2-CL-PBV-007 is explained next. Their linkage is preserved, not represented as a completed current-bank audit. Before opening an answer, identify the offence category, whether guilt has been established, the procedural question currently being asked and the next lawful decision. Repair: return to the decision branch that failed, then explain what one changed fact would send the case down a different branch.

This is the ordinary adult route. The preceding sections explain classification and the special routes; the youth chapter supplies the child-specific rules. Authorities: Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 sections 17A and 19–21.