The claimant sought judicial review of the enhanced criminal record issued by the respondents when he sought a licence as a private hire driver. He had been tried and acquitted on a charge of rape.
Held: The request for review failed.
After referring to Allen v UK, the judge said or article 6: ‘a) The aim of Article 6.2 (after acquittal) is to protect the individual who is acquitted from being treated in subsequent proceedings or by public officials as if in fact guilty of the offence charged. Contrary to Mr Southey’s submission that the disclosure here ‘implies that [the claimant] is guilty of a serious sexual offence’, in my view it does no such thing. In no way does it suggest that he should have been convicted, nor does it suggest that he in fact committed the acts complained of. What may fairly be implied is the suggestion that, notwithstanding the acquittal, he may in fact have committed the acts complained of; that does not, however, impugn the correctness of the acquittal, and I accept Mr Coppel’s submission that there is a valid distinction between a statement casting doubt on the correctness of an acquittal and a statement that suggests that, notwithstanding the acquittal, the claimant might have committed the acts alleged.
b) In my judgment, it is no breach of article 6(2) to imply, in a statement made lawfully under Section 113B(4) of the Police Act 1997, that, notwithstanding the acquittal, the claimant might in fact have committed the act complained of in a criminal charge. For such disclosure to be lawful, it must be justified under Article 8, as I have found this disclosure to be, and in my view that renders the disclosure lawful under the ECHR.’
Raynor QC HHJ
[2013] EWHC 2721 (Admin)
Bailii
Police Act 1997, European Convention on Human Rights 6(2)
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – AR, Regina (on The Application of) v Greater Manchester Police and Another CA 10-Jun-2016
The claimant complained that despite his acquittal after trial on a charge of rape, the accusation was revealed by the defendant on application for an enhanced criminal record certificate.
Held: The information contained in the certificate . .
At Admn – AR, Regina (on The Application of) v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police and Another SC 30-Jul-2018
The appellant had been tried for and acquitted on a criminal charge. He now challenged the disclosure by the respondent of the charge in an Enhanced Criminal Record Certificate.
Held: His appeal failed. The critical question was whether the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 11 August 2021; Ref: scu.584693 br>