Click the case name for better results:

Kenny, Regina (on the Application of) v Leeds Magistrates Court, Leeds City Council: Admn 5 Dec 2003

In cases involving children, Article 3 provides that the best interests of the child are a primary consideration, not the primary consideration. The court looked at the test for making an interim ASBO: ‘Consideration of whether it is just to make an order without notice is necessarily a balancing exercise. The court must balance the … Continue reading Kenny, Regina (on the Application of) v Leeds Magistrates Court, Leeds City Council: Admn 5 Dec 2003

B v Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs and the Lord Chancellor: CA 2003

On an application for an interim anti-social behaviour order, the court must consider whether the application for a final order has been properly made. Judges: Kennedy LJ Citations: [2003] 1 All ER 531 Statutes: Crime and Disorder Act 1998 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Manchester City Council v Muir and Another CA … Continue reading B v Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs and the Lord Chancellor: CA 2003

North Devon Homes Housing Association v Brazier: QBD 2003

The tenant was guilty of nuisance, but her misbehaviour was attributable to her psychotic state – her ‘disability’ within the 1995 Act. Held: Though a very pertinent factor to be taken into account may be a housing authority’s obligations to other tenants on a housing estate and the interests of those other tenants, though the … Continue reading North Devon Homes Housing Association v Brazier: QBD 2003

The Chief Constable of Lancashire v Potter: Admn 13 Oct 2003

The claimant appealed refusal of an Anti-Social Behaviour order by the magistrates. The respondent was a street prostitute in Preston. The magistrates had declined to aggregate her behaviour with that of others to find that it caused harrassment alarm or distress to a criminal standard of proof. Held: The court is being asked to decide … Continue reading The Chief Constable of Lancashire v Potter: Admn 13 Oct 2003

London Borough of Harrow v Qazi: HL 31 Jul 2003

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

Acts

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

Carter v Crown Prosecution Service: Admn 27 Jul 2009

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

Singh, Regina (on the Application of) v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police: CA 28 Jul 2006

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

Singh and others v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police: QBD 4 Nov 2005

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

Regina (W) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis and Another: CA 11 May 2006

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

Sierny v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 15 Feb 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

Regina (Brian Turner) v Highbury Magistrates Court: QBD 11 Oct 2005

The claimant had faced an application for a closure order on his premises for their use for unlawful drugs. The matter was adjourned twice at his request. On the third occasion he sought to rely upon the need for a closure order to be confirmed with 14 days to say that the order must lapse. … Continue reading Regina (Brian Turner) v Highbury Magistrates Court: QBD 11 Oct 2005

Manchester City Council v Pinnock: SC 3 Nov 2010

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

Birmingham City Council v Shafi and Another: CA 30 Oct 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

Regina on the Application of Keating v Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council: QBD 22 Jul 2004

Refusal of magistrates to make order prohibiting disclosure of child’s name on application for anti-social behaviour order. Judges: Mr Justice Harrison Citations: [2004] EWHC 1933 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Children and Young Persons Act 1933 39, Crime and Disorder Act 1998 1D Jurisdiction: England and Wales Magistrates, Children Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.200314

Kennedy v The Charity Commission: SC 26 Mar 2014

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

Han and Yau t/a Murdishaw Supper Bar, and Others v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: CA 3 Jul 2001

The applicant claimed that proceedings under which he had been accused of fraud in dishonestly evading VAT liability were in reality criminal proceedings and that the minimum standards of a fair trial applied. Held: The characterisation under the rules of such proceedings as civil was a starting point only. The fact that no sanction of … Continue reading Han and Yau t/a Murdishaw Supper Bar, and Others v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: CA 3 Jul 2001

Regina v Manchester Crown Court, ex parte McCann and others: QBD 22 Nov 2000

An application for an anti-social behaviour order against an individual was a civil, not a criminal proceeding. The standard of evidence required was on the balance of probability; the civil standard. Such proceedings were not subject to the additional protection of the human rights convention. Necessarily, the circumstances from which protection was sought were ones … Continue reading Regina v Manchester Crown Court, ex parte McCann and others: QBD 22 Nov 2000

Benham v United Kingdom: ECHR 8 Feb 1995

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

Albert And Le Compte v Belgium (Article 50): ECHR 24 Oct 1983

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

Proprietary Articles Trade Association v Attorney-General for Canada: PC 1931

The Board was asked how to identify whether an allegation amounted to a criminal one. Lord Atkin said: ‘It appears to their Lordships to be of little value to seek to confine crimes to a category of acts which by their very nature belong to the domain of ‘criminal jurisprudence’; for the domain of criminal … Continue reading Proprietary Articles Trade Association v Attorney-General for Canada: PC 1931

Francome v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd: CA 1984

The defendant had acquired illegal tapes of telephone conversations which it said implicated the plaintiff. He sought to restrain publication of the material pending forthcoming discliplinary charges at the Jockey Club. Held: The court had to find a balance of justice. The court spoke of the media and the public interest. Sir John Donaldson MR … Continue reading Francome v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd: CA 1984

Pyx Granite Ltd v Ministry of Housing and Local Government: HL 1959

There is a strong presumption that Parliament will not legislate to prevent individuals affected by legal measures promulgated by executive public bodies having a fair opportunity to challenge these measures and to vindicate their rights in court proceedings doing so. Viscount Simonds said: ‘It is a principle not by any means to be whittled down … Continue reading Pyx Granite Ltd v Ministry of Housing and Local Government: HL 1959

Customs and Excise Commissioners v City of London Magistrates’ Court: QBD 2000

Access orders were sought by the Customs and Excise against banks to facilitate an investigation into the affairs of taxpayers and the issue was whether the resulting proceedings constituted ‘criminal proceedings’ within the meaning of section 19(1). Held: ‘It is in my judgment the general understanding that criminal proceedings involve a formal accusation made on … Continue reading Customs and Excise Commissioners v City of London Magistrates’ Court: QBD 2000

Sporrong and Lonnroth v Sweden: ECHR 23 Sep 1982

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

AN, Regina (on the Application of) v Mental Health Review Tribunal (Northern Region) and others: CA 21 Dec 2005

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

Regina v Special Adjudicator ex parte Ullah; Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 17 Jun 2004

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

R, Regina (on the Application of) v Durham Constabulary and Another: HL 17 Mar 2005

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

Unterpertinger v Austria: ECHR 24 Nov 1986

The defendant was convicted of causing actual bodily harm, mainly on the basis of statements which his wife and daughter had given to the police. His wife and daughter took advantage of their right not to give evidence at his trial and so could not be cross-examined on their statements. Held: Where a conviction is … Continue reading Unterpertinger v Austria: ECHR 24 Nov 1986

Hallam, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: SC 30 Jan 2019

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

Kay and Another v London Borough of Lambeth and others; Leeds City Council v Price and others and others: HL 8 Mar 2006

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

Engel And Others v The Netherlands (1): ECHR 8 Jun 1976

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

Clark v TDG Limited (Trading As Novacold): CA 25 Mar 1999

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

Roberts and Others v Regina: CACD 6 Dec 2018

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

GC v The Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis: SC 18 May 2011

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

Stott (Procurator Fiscal, Dunfermline) and Another v Brown: PC 5 Dec 2000

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

Horncastle and Others, Regina v: SC 9 Dec 2009

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

Regina v Kansal (2): HL 29 Nov 2001

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

Regina v Parole Board ex parte Smith, Regina v Parole Board ex parte West (Conjoined Appeals): HL 27 Jan 2005

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

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

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

Akerman-Livingstone v Aster Communities Ltd: SC 11 Mar 2015

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

Amand v Home Secretary and Minister of Defence of Royal Netherlands Government: HL 1943

A Dutch serviceman who had been arrested for desertion and brought before a magistrate who ordered him to be handed over to the Dutch military authorities under the Allied Forces Act 1940. An application for habeas corpus was rejected by a Divisional Court. The Court of Appeal held that they had no jurisdiction to entertain … Continue reading Amand v Home Secretary and Minister of Defence of Royal Netherlands Government: HL 1943

B v Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary: QBD 5 Apr 2000

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

Doherty and others v Birmingham City Council: HL 30 Jul 2008

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

Perinpanathan, Regina (on The Application of) v City of Westminster Magistrates Court and Another: CA 4 Feb 2010

The appellant’s daughter had been stopped entering the country with andpound;150,000 in cash. The police sought an order for its forfeiture, suspecting a link with terrorism. The magistrates found no evidence of such, and declined to make the order, but equally refused to award the defendant her costs. She now appealed against the refusal to … Continue reading Perinpanathan, Regina (on The Application of) v City of Westminster Magistrates Court and Another: CA 4 Feb 2010

Oakes and Others v Regina: CACD 21 Nov 2012

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

In re LU (A Child); In re LB (A Child) (Serious Injury: Standard of Proof); re U (A Child) (Department for Education and Skills intervening): CA 14 May 2004

In each case, the other parent appealed care orders where she had been found to have injured her children. In each case the sole evidence was the injury to the child’s health and expert medical evidence. The cases were referred following the Cannings case. Held: The appeals failed. It was wrong to diminish the difference … Continue reading In re LU (A Child); In re LB (A Child) (Serious Injury: Standard of Proof); re U (A Child) (Department for Education and Skills intervening): CA 14 May 2004

In re B (Children) (Care Proceedings: Standard of Proof) (CAFCASS intervening): HL 11 Jun 2008

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

In re S-B (Children) (Care proceedings: Standard of proof): SC 14 Dec 2009

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

In re H and R (Minors) (Child Sexual Abuse: Standard of Proof): HL 14 Dec 1995

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

Lauko v Slovakia: ECHR 2 Sep 1998

The applicant was fined under the domestic Minor Offences Act for accusing his neighbours, without justification, of causing a nuisance. The government relied on the modesty of the punishment capable of being imposed and the fact that the offence . .