by an external senior QC previously uninvolved in the case. Overturning of the CPS decision On 29 June 2015, it was reported the decision of the Director of Public Prosecutions not to prosecute Janner had been overturned by David Perry, the QC appointed to make a review of the CPS decision in April. A judge was now to decide if Janner was fit to stand a criminal trial. The case was considered at Westminster Magistrates' Court on 7 August; the court ruled that Janner must attend the preliminary hearing, if only briefly. Janner was in court for less than a minute on 14 August to identify himself. The next hearing was at the Old Bailey on 1 September; Janner was not required to appear. On 7 December 2015, it was ruled at the Old Bailey that Janner was unfit to stand trial. The presiding judge, Mr Justice Openshaw, summarised his decision based on the evidence from four medical experts: "The defendant has advanced and disabling dementia that has deteriorated and is irreversible, and accordingly I find that he is unfit to plead." A trial of the facts was scheduled to take place in April 2016, at which a jury would have heard the evidence and come to a conclusion about Janner's alleged abuse, but would not have been able to decide Janner's innocence or guilt. Posthumous developments Janner died on 19 December 2015, and criminal proceedings against him ended with his death. Old Bailey judge Mr Justice Openshaw said in January 2016: "There is nothing more to be said. That's the end of the proceedings, that the defendant is dead". Liz Dux, a solicitor for six of Janner's alleged abuse victims, said that claims against the estate would be made in the civil courts. However, in March 2017, three of the claimants dropped their civil suits, followed by six more in May, signalling an end to all civil actions against his estate. In an interview with The Times, the Janner family declared, "Our father's reputation as a man who devoted his life to good has been restored." His son, Daniel Janner, stated, "These false accusers, having dropped their claim because they risk being cross-examined, can no longer form the basis of this strand. Accordingly, the existence of this strand undermines the integrity of the important work of the inquiry." On 15 January 2016, further allegations of abuse were made by