These appeals concern the statutory provisions governing the eligibility for compensation of persons convicted of a criminal offence where their conviction is subsequently quashed (or they are pardoned) because of the impact of fresh evidence. It was argued that the failure to make payment amounted to a denial of the right to the presumption of … Continue reading Hallam, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: SC 30 Jan 2019
The applicant had held a joint tenancy of the respondent. His partner gave notice and left, and the property was taken into possession. The claimant claimed restoration of his tenancy saying the order did not respect his right to a private life and home. Held: Article 8 does not, in terms, give a right to … Continue reading London Borough of Harrow v Qazi: HL 31 Jul 2003
The House was asked ‘whether a local authority can obtain a summary order for possession against an occupier of a site which it owns and has been used for many years as a gipsy and travellers’ caravan site. His licence to occupy the site has come to an end. He has no enforceable right to … Continue reading Doherty and others v Birmingham City Council: HL 30 Jul 2008
The Council appealed a finding that the court did not have jurisdiction to obtain without notice injunctions to control the behaviour of youths said to be creating a disturbance, including restricting their rights to enter certain parts of the city with named others. The council was using the orders to attempt to control gang activities. … Continue reading Birmingham City Council v Shafi and Another: CA 30 Oct 2008
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
Citations: [2006] EWHC 1888 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003 30 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Crime, Police Updated: 14 November 2022; Ref: scu.243379
W, a child of 14 sought judicial review of an order to remove persons under the age of 16 from dispersal areas in Richmond. Held: The issue was whether the power given to police to remove youths was permissive or coercive. The power given ‘is exercisable whenever a person who is believed on reasonable grounds … Continue reading Regina on the Application of PW v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis, The London Borough of Richmond-Upon-Thames: Admn 20 Jul 2005
An authorisation had been given for the police to exercise additional powers to control anti-social behaviour. It had been marked ‘restricted’, and the notice provisions were not originally complied with. A proper but incomprehensible notice was prepared and an additional more informal but non-compliant notice circulated. The appellant had been standing with others. He had … Continue reading Carter v Crown Prosecution Service: Admn 27 Jul 2009
Sikh protesters set out to picket a theatre production which they considered to offend their religion. The respondent used a existing ASBO dispersal order which had been obtained for other purposes, to control the demonstration. Held: The appeal failed. A valid order could be used when necessary even if for purposes not foreseen when the … Continue reading Singh, Regina (on the Application of) v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police: CA 28 Jul 2006
A play was presented which was seen by many Sikhs as offensive. Protesters were eventually ordered to disperse under s30 of the 2003 Act. The defendants appealed their convictions for having breached that order, saying that it interfered with their rights of free speech and of assembly. Held: The appeal failed. There had been a … Continue reading Singh and others v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police: QBD 4 Nov 2005
The Commissioner appealed against a declaration that an authorisation given for creation of a dispersal area was unlawful. Held: The proceedings appeared at first to be merely hypothetical, but the issue as to whether a police officer had use reasonable force to remove a child from a dspersal area was a live issue of general … Continue reading Regina (W) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis and Another: CA 11 May 2006
An authorisation for a dispersal order under the Act must specify, if only in summary form, the grounds upon which it is made. A mere statement that an officer had grounds for making an authorisation was not sufficient. Specification of the grounds ‘informs the reader, albeit in broad terms, of the nature of the problem … Continue reading Sierny v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 15 Feb 2006
Judges: Lloyd Jones J Citations: [2009] EWHC 264 (Admin), (2009) 173 JP 121, [2009] ACD 52 Links: Bailii Statutes: Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003 2 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Police Updated: 23 November 2022; Ref: scu.303139
In each case the tenant occupied the property as his home, but was not a secure tenant of the local authority. The Court was asked whether, in granting a possession order in such a case, the court was obliged to consider the proportionality of the order requested. Powell had been given emergency accomodation as a … Continue reading London Borough of Hounslow v Powell, Leeds City Council v Hall etc: SC 23 Feb 2011
The council tenant had wished to appeal following a possession order made after her tenancy had been demoted. The court handed down a supplemental judgment to give effect to its earlier decision. The Court had been asked ‘whether article 8 of the . . Convention . . requires a court, which is being asked to … Continue reading Manchester City Council v Pinnock: SC 9 Feb 2011
The claimant journalist sought disclosure of papers acquired by the respondent in its conduct of enquiries into the charitable Mariam appeal. The Commission referred to an absolute exemption under section 32(2) of the 2000 Act, saying that the exemption continued until the papers were destroyed, or for 20 years under the 1958 Act. Held: The … Continue reading Kennedy v The Charity Commission: SC 26 Mar 2014
The several applicants had been arrested in different circumstances and each charged with breach of the peace contrary to common law. Under the Magistrates’ Court Act 1980, the court can bind over a Defendant to keep the peace, if the Defendant consents, and impose a sentence of up to 6 months’ imprisonment if the Defendant … Continue reading Steel and Others v The United Kingdom: ECHR 23 Sep 1998
Each applicant sought judicial review of the refusal of the tribunal to authorise their release from detention under the 1983 Act, saying that the Tribunal had accepted evidence to a lower standard of proof. Held: Neither the criminal standard of proof nor the level of proof set down in Addington applied. To raise the standard … Continue reading Regina (DJ) v Mental Health Review Tribunal; Regina (AN) v Mental Health Review Tribunal (Northern Region): Admn 11 Apr 2005
The defendant family was served without notice with an anti-social behaviour order ordering them to leave their home immediately, and making other very substantial restrictions. The evidence in large part related to other people entirely. Held: To grant an injunction without notice is to grant an exceptional remedy. As to hearsay evidence: ‘ the experience … Continue reading Moat Housing Group-South Ltd v Harris and Another: CA 16 Mar 2005
Legal Aid was wrongfully refused where a tax or fine defaulter was liable to imprisonment, and the lack of a proper means enquiry, made imprisonment of poll tax defaulter unlawful. A poll tax defaulter had been wrongly committed to prison by magistrates. The question was whether or not they had acted in excess of jurisdiction. … Continue reading Benham v United Kingdom: ECHR 8 Feb 1995
The applicants were Belgian nationals and medical practitioners. Dr Le Compte was suspended from practising medicine for two years for an offence against professional discipline. He appealed to the Appeals Council, alleging violations of Article 6. In his absence the Appeals Council rejected his case and substituted for the two year suspension a direction to … Continue reading Albert And Le Compte v Belgium (Article 50): ECHR 24 Oct 1983
Balance of Interests in peaceful enjoyment claim (Plenary Court) The claimants challenged orders expropriating their properties for redevelopment, and the banning of construction pending redevelopment. The orders remained in place for many years. Held: Article 1 comprises three distinct rules: the first rule, set out in the first sentence of the first paragraph, is general … Continue reading Sporrong and Lonnroth v Sweden: ECHR 23 Sep 1982
The appellant was detained under section 37 of the 1983 Act as a mental patient with a restriction under section 41. He sought his release. Held: The standard of proof in such applications remained the balance of probabilities, but that standard was flexible, and varied according to the seriousness of the allegation. The only misdirection … Continue reading AN, Regina (on the Application of) v Mental Health Review Tribunal (Northern Region) and others: CA 21 Dec 2005
The applicants had had their requests for asylum refused. They complained that if they were removed from the UK, their article 3 rights would be infringed. If they were returned to Pakistan or Vietnam they would be persecuted for their religious faiths. Held: A distinction was to be made between domestic cases involving actions within … Continue reading Regina v Special Adjudicator ex parte Ullah; Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 17 Jun 2004
The appellant, a boy aged 15, had been warned as to admitted indecent assaults on girls. He complained that it had not been explained to him that the result would be that his name would be placed on the sex offenders register. The Chief Constable appealed a decision that this was an interference in his … Continue reading R, Regina (on the Application of) v Durham Constabulary and Another: HL 17 Mar 2005
The tenant had been secure but had his tenancy had been reduced to an insecure demoted tenancy after he was accused of anti-social behaviour. He had not himself been accused of any misbehaviour, but it was said that he should have controlled his family members. The county court had been unwilling to allow any challenge … Continue reading Manchester City Council v Pinnock: SC 3 Nov 2010
In each case the local authority sought to recover possession of its own land. In the Lambeth case, they asserted this right as against an overstaying former tenant, and in the Leeds case as against gypsies. In each case the occupiers said that the recovery of possession interfered with their right respect for their family … Continue reading Kay and Another v London Borough of Lambeth and others; Leeds City Council v Price and others and others: HL 8 Mar 2006
The court was asked whether proceedings in a military court against soldiers for disciplinary offences involved criminal charges within the meaning of Article 6(1): ‘In this connection, it is first necessary to know whether the provision(s) defining the offence charged belong, according to the legal system of the respondent State, to criminal law, disciplinary law … Continue reading Engel And Others v The Netherlands (1): ECHR 8 Jun 1976
The applicant had soft tissue injuries around the spine as a consequence of a back injury at work. He was absent from work for a long time as a result of his injuries, and he was eventually dismissed when his medical advisers could provide no clear idea of when it would be possible for him … Continue reading Clark v TDG Limited (Trading As Novacold): CA 25 Mar 1999
Sentencing of Political Protesters The defendants appealed against sentences for causing a public nuisance. They had been protesting against fracking by climbing aboard a lorry and blocking a main road for several days. Held: The appeals from immediate custodial sentences were successful, and suspended sentences imposed. The defendants had expressed remorse for their actions and … Continue reading Roberts and Others v Regina: CACD 6 Dec 2018
The court was asked to decide from whom DNA samples could lawfully be taken by the Police,and for how long they should be kept. The first respondent now said that a declaration of incompatibility of section 64(1A) could not be avoided. Held: (Majority: Lord Dyson, Lord Phillips, Lady Hale, Lord Judge and Lord Kerr. Dissenting: … Continue reading GC v The Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis: SC 18 May 2011
The system under which the registered keeper of a vehicle was obliged to identify herself as the driver, and such admission was to be used subsequently as evidence against her on a charge of driving with excess alcohol, was not a breach of her right to a fair trial. The right not to give evidence … Continue reading Stott (Procurator Fiscal, Dunfermline) and Another v Brown: PC 5 Dec 2000
Each defendant said they had not received a fair trial in that the court had admitted written evidence of a witness he had not been allowed to challenge. The witnesses had been victims, two of whom had died before trial. It was suggested that the court must implement the ECHR decision in Al-Khawaja. Held: The … Continue reading Horncastle and Others, Regina v: SC 9 Dec 2009
The prosecutor had lead and relied at trial on evidence obtained by compulsory questioning under the 1986 Act. Held: In doing so the prosecutor was acting to give effect to section 433. The decision in Lambert to disallow retrospective effect of Human Rights decisions in appeal cases may have been incorrect, but will be followed. … Continue reading Regina v Kansal (2): HL 29 Nov 2001
Each defendant challenged the way he had been treated on revocation of his parole licence, saying he should have been given the opportunity to make oral representations. Held: The prisoners’ appeals were allowed. Lord Bingham stated: ‘While an oral hearing is most obviously necessary to achieve a just decision in a case where facts are … Continue reading Regina v Parole Board ex parte Smith, Regina v Parole Board ex parte West (Conjoined Appeals): HL 27 Jan 2005
The applicants had been made subject of anti-social behaviour orders. They challenged the basis upon which the orders had been made. Held: The orders had no identifiable consequences which would make the process a criminal one. Civil standards of evidence therefore applied, and hearsay evidence was admissible. Nevertheless, the test as to whether it was … Continue reading Clingham (formerly C (a minor)) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea; Regina v Crown Court at Manchester Ex parte McCann and Others: HL 17 Oct 2002
Appeal about the proper approach of the courts where the defendant to a claim for possession of his home raises a defence of unlawful discrimination, contrary to the Equality Act 2010, by the claimant landlord. In particular, the issue is whether the courts are entitled to take the same summary approach to such a defence, … Continue reading Akerman-Livingstone v Aster Communities Ltd: SC 11 Mar 2015
The defendant appealed the making of a sex offender order under 1998 Act. The justices had found that the defendant was a sex offender within section 2(1)(a) and that he had acted on a number of occasions in a way which brought him within section 2(1)(b). Held: The civil standard of proof is flexible and … Continue reading B v Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary: QBD 5 Apr 2000
A specially constituted CACD heard sentencing appeals for defendants serving life terms for very grave crimes, and in particular, the judicial assessment of the minimum term to be served by the appellants for the purposes of punishment and retribution before the possibility of their release may be considered. It was argued that a whole life … Continue reading Oakes and Others v Regina: CACD 21 Nov 2012
Balance of probabilities remains standard of proof There had been cross allegations of abuse within the family, and concerns by the authorities for the children. The judge had been unable to decide whether the child had been shown to be ‘likely to suffer significant harm’ as a consequence. Having found some evidence to suggest that … Continue reading In re B (Children) (Care Proceedings: Standard of Proof) (CAFCASS intervening): HL 11 Jun 2008
A child was found to have bruising consistent with physical abuse. Either or both parents might have caused it, but the judge felt it likely that only one had, that he was unable to decide which, and that they were not so serious that he had to say that the other must have known. Held: … Continue reading In re S-B (Children) (Care proceedings: Standard of proof): SC 14 Dec 2009
Evidence allowed – Care Application after Abuse Children had made allegations of serious sexual abuse against their step-father. He was acquitted at trial, but the local authority went ahead with care proceedings. The parents appealed against a finding that a likely risk to the children had still been been found. Held: A care order could … Continue reading In re H and R (Minors) (Child Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof): HL 14 Dec 1995
The courts adopt an approach similar to that of the United States courts where there has been a significant contempt on the part of a party to litigation. Denning LJ said: ‘Those cases seem to me to point the way to the modern rule. It is a strong . .
