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
Search Results for: Street Offences Act 1959
Behrendt v Burridge: QBD 1975
The defendant, a prostitute wearing revealing clothing sat silent and motionless behind a bay window, illuminated by a red light, to advertise her services as a prostitute. Held: She was soliciting, in the sense of tempting or alluring prospective customers to visit her for the purposes of prostitution. No movement, signal or words were required. … Continue reading Behrendt v Burridge: QBD 1975
Director of Public Prosecutions v Bull: QBD 30 May 1994
Offence of loitering by common prostitute cannot be committed by a man. The term ‘common prostitute’ can only apply to a woman. Citations: Times 01-Jun-1994, Ind Summary 30-May-1994 Statutes: Street Offences Act 1959 1, Street Offences Act 1959 1(1) Crime Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.79991
Collins v Wilcock: QBD 1984
The defendant appealed against her conviction for assaulting a police constable in the execution of his duty. He had sought to caution her with regard to activity as a prostitute. The 1959 Act gave no power to detain, but he took hold of her. She resisted, and injured him. Held: There was no arrest, and … Continue reading Collins v Wilcock: QBD 1984
Smith v Hughes: QBD 1960
A prostitute offered her services from the balcony of a house.
Held: She was guilty of the offence of soliciting ‘in a street or public place’ contrary to section 1(1) of the 1959 Act. Applying the mischief rule, it could be seen that her . .
Weitz and Another v Monaghan: 2 Feb 1962
It was the prostitute who was guilty of soliciting by his or her physical presence. It was not enough for a written advertisement to be placed by him or her, or on their behalf, in a public place . A prostitute who displays an advertisement in a . .
Burge v Director of Public Prosecutions: 1962
. .
Weitz and Another v Monaghan; 2 Feb 1962
References: [1962] 1 WLR 262 Coram: Lord Parker CJ, with whom Ashworth and MacKenna JJ It was the prostitute who was guilty of soliciting by his or her physical presence. It was not enough for a written advertisement to be placed by him or her, or on their behalf, in a public place . A … Continue reading Weitz and Another v Monaghan; 2 Feb 1962
Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another, Ex Parte Finninvest Spa and Others: QBD 23 Oct 1996
The referral of an approach from the Italian authorities for help to the Serious Fraud Office was not wrong. Where assistance is being given to an authority abroad in relation to an on-going investigation both the letter of request and the draft warrant are likely of necessity to be drawn in wide terms. The 1990 … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another, Ex Parte Finninvest Spa and Others: QBD 23 Oct 1996
Regina v Horseferry Road Magistrates’ Court, ex Parte Bennett (No 1): HL 24 Jun 1993
The defendant had been brought to the UK in a manner which was in breach of extradition law. He had, in effect, been kidnapped by the authorities. Held: The High Court may look at how an accused person was brought within the jurisdiction when examining a question about that person’s detention. It is axiomatic ‘that … Continue reading Regina v Horseferry Road Magistrates’ Court, ex Parte Bennett (No 1): HL 24 Jun 1993
Shaw v Director of Public Prosecutions: HL 4 May 1961
Offence of Conspiracy to corrupt public morals The defendant appealed against his convictions for conspiracy to corrupt public morals, and for living from the earnings of prostitution. He said that first was not an offence known to common law. After it became unlawful for a prostitute to ply her trade on the streets, the defendant … Continue reading Shaw v Director of Public Prosecutions: HL 4 May 1961
Regina v Brown (Anthony); Regina v Lucas; etc: HL 11 Mar 1993
The appellants had been convicted of assault, after having engaged in consensual acts of sado-masochism in which they inflicted varying degreees of physical self harm. They had pleaded guilty after a ruling that the prosecution had not needed to prove the absence of consent. They said it was their human right to give consent to … Continue reading Regina v Brown (Anthony); Regina v Lucas; etc: HL 11 Mar 1993
