The appellant a BNP member had displayed a large poster in his bedroom window saying ‘Islam out of Britain’. He was convicted of an aggravated attempt to cause alarm or distress. The offence was established on proof of several matters, unless the defendant could establish one of the statutory defences. He argued these should be … Continue reading Norwood v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 3 Jul 2003
ECJ The court considered the measure of compensation in a successful claim for sex discrimination arising from the health authority’s provision of an earlier compulsory retirement age for women compared with that for men in the same employment. The health authority paid her the maximum sum of pounds 6,250 which was then permitted as compensation … Continue reading M H Marshall v Southampton And South West Hampshire Area Health Authority (Teaching): ECJ 26 Feb 1986
The defendant appealed against his conviction for driving with excess alcohol. He complained that though the officers suspected him of having consumed alcohol, they asked him whether he had been drinking without cautioning him, and that no print out from the Intoximeter having been produced, there was no evidence on which he could be convicted. … Continue reading Sneyd v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 24 Feb 2006
The appellant had been approached and searched by police officers and swore at them. He now appealed against a conviction under section 5 of the 1986 Act. Held: The use of the word ‘fuck’ was common in such situations. Neither officer had claimed to have been alarmed or distressed by the use of the word, … Continue reading Harvey v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 17 Nov 2011
A preacher repeatedly displayed posters such as ‘Stop Homosexuality’ and ‘Stop Lesbianism’. He had been convicted of displaying a sign which was threatening abusive or insulting within the sight of a person likely to be caused harrassment alarm on distress. On one occasion a crowd of 30 or more had gathered outside his house. Held: … Continue reading Director of Public Prosecutions v Hammond: QBD 13 Jan 2004
The essentials of the basic section 5 offence require the court to be satisfied as to the accused’s subjective state of mind, namely that he intended that the representation should be, or was aware that it might be, threatening, abusive or insulting. Judges: Nolan LJ Citations: Times 18-Sep-1991 Statutes: Public Order Act 1986 5(1)(b) Jurisdiction: … Continue reading Director of Public Prosecutions v Clarke and Others: QBD 30 Jul 1991
Whether offence was racially aggravated – charge of using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress which was religiously aggravated in accordance with section 28 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, contrary to section 5(1) of the Public … Continue reading Director of Public Prosecutions, Regina (on the Application of) v Humphrey: Admn 20 Apr 2005
The court was asked whether a police constable was a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress contrary to s. 5(1)(a) of the Public Order Act 1986. Held: Glidewell LJ discussed the offence under section 5 where words used toward the police officer were the basis of the charge: ‘I find nothing in … Continue reading Director of Public Prosecutions v Orum: 1988
Glidewell LJ discussed the offence under section 5 where words used toward the police officer were the basis of the charge: ‘Very frequently words and behaviour with which police officers will be wearily familiar will have little emotional impact on . .
The defendant sought to challenge the handling of his trial for disorderly conduct, and of the way the matter had been dealt with in his appeal to the crown court. He particularly complained of papers not being provided to him. Held: He had exercised his right to appeal to the Crown Court, and had succeeded. … Continue reading Milne, Regina (on the Application of) v Berwick-Upon-Tweed Magistrates’ Court: Admn 24 Jul 2008
The parties had gone through a form of marriage, but the purported husband was many years later revealed to be a female to male transsexual. The marriage had been annulled. There was now an application for ancillary relief. Held: Ancillary relief might be available to a trans-sexual whose marriage is annulled. The principle of public … Continue reading S v S-T (Formerly J): CA 25 Nov 1996
The court discussed when it was appropriate for the Court of Appeal to substitute other lesser convictions, after the main conviction had been declared unsafe. Held: After studying the authorities at length, the court felt that the various convictions should be quashed, but that in some cases there was a possibility of substituting verdicts of … Continue reading Regina v Graham, Kansal, etc: CACD 25 Oct 1996
The Court considered the procedures when a prisoner is kept in solitary confinement, otherwise described as ‘segregation’ or ‘removal from association’, and principally whether decisions to keep the appellants in segregation for substantial periods were taken lawfully. Held: The segregation was not authorised by the applicable legislation: ‘rule 45 . . (1) enables the governor … Continue reading Bourgass and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: SC 29 Jul 2015
The claimants had variously been attending a demonstration in London, or passing through. The police detained them in a cordon for several hours. They sought damages. No unlawful acts were alleged against them. Held: There was no deprivation of liberty during the initial period when the cordon was not absolute and people were free to … Continue reading Austin and Another v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis: QBD 23 Mar 2005
The court heard a contributors’ petition. The directors were in deadlock with equal shareholdings. The petition was not making good progress, and a creditor’s petition was then issued. The shareholder sought a stay. Held: There was a sufficient allegation of insolvency in the petition, and it was right that the petition should be allowed to … Continue reading Re Camburn Petroleum Products Ltd: ChD 1979
EAT Unfair Dismissal – OtherThe employer appealed a finding of unfair dismissal and disability discrimination. She suffered an apparently minor injury, but which led to long standing disability with varying diagnoses. The company doctor came to consider it would be a long time before she could return. She was dismissed for capability. Held: There was … Continue reading Gate Gourmet v J B Jangra: EAT 12 Dec 2000
The respondent appealed against a finding that the provision which made a loan agreement completely invalid for lack of compliance with the 1974 Act was itself invalid under the Human Rights Act since it deprived the respondent lender of its property rights. It was also argued that it was not possible to make a declaration … Continue reading Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2): HL 10 Jul 2003
The applicant was a solicitor employed by a company in Belgium. He later resigned claiming unfair dismissal, saying he had been pressed to become involved in unlawful activities. The defendants sought to challenge the jurisdiction of the English Tribunal system. The defendants had begun procedures in Spain for conciliation. The claimant had obtained an injunction … Continue reading Turner v Grovit and others: HL 13 Dec 2001
The applicants sought asylum, and, saying that they were children under eighteen, sought also the assistance of the local authority. Social workers judged them to be over eighteen and assistance was declined. Held: The claimants’ appeals succeeded. The actual age of a party is an objective question of fact, and as such was for the … Continue reading A, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Croydon: SC 26 Nov 2009
The Commission challenged the compatibility of the NI law relating to banning nearly all abortions with Human Rights Law. It now challenged a decision that it did not have standing to bring the case.
Held: (Lady Hale, Lord Kerr and Lord Wilson . .
(Grand Chamber) When considering the appropriateness of a deportation order to a country with which the deporting country had a memorandum of understanding that the destination country would not torture the deportee, a court must look beyond the . .
