Skip to content

April 2026: Thirlwall Inquiry final report due after Easter · CCRC still reviewing 31+ independent expert reports · Shoo Lee Panel (Feb 2025): no medical evidence of deliberate harm.

Lucy Letby Facts
Court judgment
·Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)

Court of Appeal — refusal of leave to appeal (24 May 2024)

The Court of Appeal's refusal of leave to appeal the 2023 convictions. Critically, this judgment pre-dates the February 2025 Shoo Lee Panel report and the vast majority of the independent expert reports now filed with the CCRC. The judgment addresses the specific grounds then advanced by Ms Letby's legal team; it cannot be read as a ruling on the post-February-2025 evidence that the CCRC is now examining.

Last updated

Licence: Open Government Licence v3.0

Original source: judiciary.uk

Mirrored on this site:

Crown Copyright. Mirrored under the Open Government Licence v3.0 with attribution.

Context

The Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) refused Lucy Letby’s application for leave to appeal against conviction on 24 May 2024. The judgment addresses the specific grounds then advanced by Ms Letby’s legal team, which were principally that the statistical presentation of the shift-rota chart was unduly prejudicial and that certain expert evidence ought not to have been admitted in the form in which it was.

The application was heard before the International Expert Panel convened by Dr Shoo Lee reported in February 2025, and before the majority of the 31+ independent expert reports subsequently filed with the Criminal Cases Review Commission. The Court of Appeal did not have, and could not have had, sight of the post-February-2025 material. That is why the CCRC is now the relevant body.

Key passages

Court of Appeal

We have considered the grounds of appeal advanced and the evidence on which the applicant relies. We conclude that none of the grounds is reasonably arguable. The application is accordingly refused.
R v Letby — application for leave to appeal, 24 May 2024

Court of Appeal

The applicant submits that the expert evidence of Dr Evans ought not to have been admitted in the form in which it was. Having reviewed the material, we are not persuaded that this ground has a reasonable prospect of success.
R v Letby — on expert evidence

What to read alongside this

The judgment pre-dates the February 2025 Panel report. See our pages on the air-embolism evidence, the insulin assay, the shift chart, and the Dr Evans methodology. A CCRC application was filed in October 2025; the Commission’s review is ongoing.

Related on this site

Attribution and licence

Contains public-sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Original source: judiciary.uk . Mirrored on this site on 2026-04-21.