Now that the Supreme Court has decided that the doctrine of joint enterprise has been too broadly interpreted for the past 30 years, where does that leave us? What might we expect of the many people in prison who have been found guilty and sentenced on the basis of the doctrine? What are we to expect of cases in the future when the doctrine will have to be interpreted differently? My understanding is that not only will a person have had to foresee the outcome of their actions, but they must also have intended that outcome.  

CLT will have Jo Cecil from Garden Court Chambers, who was instructed by Just Kids Law and which intervened in the case R v Jogee; Ruddock v The Queen [2016] UKSC 8, provide some explanation of and the implications of the Judgment.