Category: Crime

Almaz-Antey Air and Space Defence v Council: ECFI 25 Jan 2017

ECJ (Judgment) Common foreign and security policy – Restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining or threatening the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine – Freezing of funds – Legal person supporting, materially or financially, actions which undermine or threaten the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine – Proportionality – Obligation to state reasons – Rights of the defence – Right to effective judicial protection – Fundamental rights – Manifest error of assessment

Citations:

ECLI:EU:T:2017:25, [2017] EUECJ T-255/15

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Crime

Updated: 29 January 2022; Ref: scu.573730

Land v Land; In re Land, deceased: ChD 13 Jul 2006

The claimant had cared for his elderly mother who ‘shunned any type of ‘officialdom’ including doctors and home helps.’ However, the claimant so neglected her that she suffered severe bed sores which had become infected in consequence of her lying in her own excrement. The claimant had pleaded guilty to manslaughter. The court was asked whether he was nevertheless entitled to claim financial provision from the deceased’s estate under the 1975 Act, or was precluded from doing so by the 1982 Act.
Held: The claim had been made out of time and the court had no power to extend the statutory time limit. However. the claimant’s conduct did not disentitle him to relief under the 1975 Act and the court made an order for reasonable financial provision for the claimant out of his mother’s estate. The judge made reference to Article 1 of the First Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights, helding that the right to inherit property under a will is a ‘possession’ within the protocol. A claimant was not to be deprived of it except in the public interest. The only way that the Forfeiture Act could be given effect in a way that is compatible with convention rights would be to construe it as conferring a discretion upon the Court to mitigate the harshness of the absolute rule where it is not in the public interest to deprive the wrongdoer of all benefit from the estate.
Alastair Norris QC said: ‘The forfeiture rule is a principle of public policy, the application of which may produce unfair consequences in some cases. It is not the statement of a principle of justice designed to produce a fair result: Dunbar’s case [1998] Ch 412, 422D-E, per Mummery LJ. There is a justifiable dissatisfaction with its indiscriminate application in every case of unlawful killing: per Phillips LJ in Dunbar’s case, at p.431G. Following Dunbar’s case however it is no longer possible to discriminate in the application of the rule, only to mitigate its effects where the ends of justice require. The rule will accordingly be applied even where the public interest does not require it (and even where its application may be contrary to the public interest) but in some circumstances its effects may be mitigated.
and: ‘The Forfeiture Act is concerned with the adjustment of property rights and confers upon an individual a right to apply to the Court within a defined period. It is a form of limitation period similar to that applying to applications for reasonable provision to be made out of the estate or for rectification of a will, but (unlike the statutes which confer those rights) the Act gives the Court no discretion to extend the time for commencement of the action.’

Judges:

HHJ Alastair Norris QC

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 2069 (Ch), [2007] 1 WLR 1009, [2006] WTLR 1447, [2007] 1 All ER 324

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Forfeiture Act 1982 2, Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975 2, European Convention on Human Rights 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Dunbar (As Administrator of Tony Dunbar Deceased) v Plant CA 23-Jul-1997
The couple had decided on a suicide pact. They made repeated attempts, resulting in his death. Property had been held in joint names. The deceased’s father asked the court to apply the 1982 Act to disentitle Miss Plant.
Held: The appeal was . .

Cited by:

Cited – Jenkins, Regina (on The Application of) v HM Coroner for Portsmouth and South and Others Admn 11-Dec-2009
The deceased had contracted gangrene, but not sought treatment, and he died of it. The claimant challenged the narrative verdict saying that it was perverse and that the only proper verdict was unlawful killing by his partner, a nurse who had . .
Cited – Mack v Lockwood and Others ChD 19-Jun-2009
The claimant had been convicted of the manslaughter of his wife. He now applied for relief agsinst forfeiture of his share of her estate. He was elderly and had suffered some mental impairment after a stroke, which might have led him to misjudge his . .
Cited – Challen v Challen and Another ChD 27-May-2020
Forfeiture rule disapplied after spousal abuse
The claimant sought the disapplication of the forfeiture rule. She had been convicted of the manslaughter of her seriously abusive husband. The court considered whether a conviction for murder set aside and replaced with one of manslaughter was a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Wills and Probate, Crime, Human Rights

Updated: 29 January 2022; Ref: scu.384056

Dobson, Regina v: CACD 6 Jul 2011

‘In this case the appellant was convicted of unlawful and malicious wounding contrary to section 20 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, but acquitted of having the offensive weapon which he was alleged to have used in the incident. The issue in the appeal is whether that conviction should be quashed on the grounds of inconsistent verdicts. ‘

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Crim 1856

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.562782

Carey and Others, Regina v: CACD 8 Mar 2006

We certify a point of law of general public importance in these terms: ‘If in the course of an affray a person uses unlawful violence amounting to an assault and that assault is the only act that all sober and reasonable people would inevitably recognise must subject the victim to the risk of some harm resulting therefrom, and if the victim dies as a result of the affray but not as a result of the assault, is anyone who is guilty of the affray also guilty of manslaughter, whether or not he was party to the assault?’
But we refuse leave to appeal to the House of Lords.

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Crim 604

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.406580

Regina v RL and JF: CACD 28 Aug 2008

Club, not members, prosecutable for breach

The Environment Agency appealed against dismissal of charges against the defendants who were officers in an unincorporated members’ golf club on whose land there had been pollution. The judge had ruled that the unincorporated association could have been prosecuted under the 1978 Act, and that a prosecution would not lie against the defendants in the absence of personal culpability.
Held: The Act made no provision to allow prosecution of unincorporated associations, and no general policy could be derived for construing such provisions, because there were such a wide range of provsions. It was not possible to draw from the absence of provisions a conclusion that unincorporated associations could not be prosecuted. In this case the offence was one of strict liability falling on the owner of the land. In every sense that in practice meant the association. Any penalty would be set by reference to the means not of the two defendants but of the club, and any conviction might have real consequences for a defendant; ‘We conclude that the judge was right in his first decision. The prosecution of the club was permissible in law. The definition of ‘person’ in the Interpretation Act 1978 applied and no contrary intention appeared.’
The judge had decided that section 217 of the 1991 meant that the club’s officers could not be prosecuted. The Act contained no ‘officers’ liability’ provision, but the judge went too far in reading into the Act a provision limiting the liability of officers in an unincorporated association to the equivalent responsibility of those in a company. Unincorporated associations varied too widely. ‘a prosecution for the strict liability offence of causing polluting matter to enter controlled waters may be brought, on the facts of this case, against either the club in its own name, or against individual members. It is for the Crown in any individual case to determine the defendant(s) whom it seeks to prosecute. The court would interfere only in the very limited case of oppression involving abuse of process.’
Hughes LJ said: ‘There are probably almost as many different types of unincorporated association as there are forms of human activity. This particular one was a club with 900 odd members, substantial land, buildings and other assets, and it had no doubt stood as an entity in every sense except the legal for many years. But the legal description ‘unincorporated association’ applies equally to any collection of individuals linked by agreement into a group. Some may be sold and permanent; others may be fleeting, and/or without assets. A village football team, with no constitution and a casual fluctuating membership, meeting on a Saturday morning on a rented pitch, is an unincorporated association, but so are a number of learned societies with large fixed assets and detailed constitutional structures . .’

Judges:

Hughes LJ, David Clarke J,Blair J

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Crim 1970, [2009] 1 All ER 786

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 2003 58, Water Resources Act 1991 217(1), Interpretation Act 1978 5

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Empress Car Company (Abertillery) Ltd v National Rivers Authority HL 22-Jan-1998
A diesel tank was in a yard which drained into a river. It was surrounded by a bund to contain spillage, but that protection was over ridden by an extension pipe from the tank to a drum outside the bund. Someone opened a tap on that pipe so that . .
Cited – Lockwood, Regina v CACD 1-May-2008
. .
Cited – Regina v R CACD 29-Feb-2008
The court considered the application of section 58 to prosecution appeals and the use of the ‘acquittal agreement’. . .
Cited – W Stevenson and Sons (A Partnership) and Another v Regina CACD 25-Feb-2008
The defendant partnership had been convicted of offences of failing to submit sales notes of the results of its fish auctions. Some individual partners sought to appeal.
Held: The statute could make a partnership liable as a separate entity. . .
Cited – Taff Vale Railway Co v Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants HL 22-Jul-1901
A trade union, an unincorporated association, could be sued in its own name despite the absence of any statutory provision permitting it. Lord Lindley said that the problem of how to adapt legal proceedings to unincorporated societies consisting of . .
Cited – Regina v Clerk to Croydon Justices ex parte Chief Constable of Kent QBD 1989
A partnership or an unincorporated association could be registered as a fine defaulter if it failed to pay a fixed penalty arising from its ownership of a motor vehicle; that was because the statutory definition of defaulter depended on the use of . .
Cited – Davey v Shawcroft 1948
The court was asked whether an agent of the committee of an unincorporated association, who was personally responsible for a breach of the licence terms, was properly convicted.
Held: Lord Goddard CJ said that section 19 meant that an . .
Cited – Attorney-General v Able and Others QBD 28-Apr-1983
The Attorney General sought a declaration as to whether it would be the crime of aiding and abetting or counselling and procuring suicide, to distribute a booklet published by the respondent which described various effective ways of committing . .

Cited by:

Cited – Boyle, Regina (On the Application of) v Haverhill Pub Watch and Others Admn 8-Oct-2009
The claimant had been banned from public houses under the Haverhill Pub Watch scheme. He now sought judicial review of a decision to extend his ban for a further two years. The Scheme argued that it was not a body amenable to judicial review, and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Company, Environment

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.273131

Regina v Barkshire and Others: CACD 20 Jul 2011

Undercover police were agents provocateur

The defendants appealed against their convictions for aggravated trespass, saying that the police had infiltrated their environmental protest group, and that the undercover officer had acted as agent provocateur to entrap them into the offences. Their defence had been one of justification.
Held: The appeals succeeded, and the convictions were quashed. The officer who had infiltrated the group had taken steps beyond those allowed in his instructions to the point of making it arguable that he had acted as agent provocateur, and to protect his identity the police had withheld recordings of meetings from the CPS and defence and which would have been of assistance to the defence: ‘These materials were pertinent to a potential submission of abuse of process by way of entrapment and in any event they had the capacity to support the defence of necessity and justification. The trial was rendered unfair and the convictions are unsafe.’ A subsequent prosecution was stopped when the officer’s role was revealed. The prosecutor had then encouraged the defendants in this appeal.

Judges:

Judge LCJ, Treacy, Calvert-Smith JJ

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Crim B3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v H; Regina v C HL 5-Feb-2004
Use of Special Counsel as Last Resort Only
The accused faced charges of conspiring to supply Class A drugs. The prosecution had sought public interest immunity certificates. Special counsel had been appointed by the court to represent the defendants’ interests at the applications.
Cited – Regina v Jones (Margaret), Regina v Milling and others HL 29-Mar-2006
Domestic Offence requires Domestic Defence
Each defendant sought to raise by way of defence of their otherwise criminal actions, the fact that they were attempting to prevent the commission by the government of the crime of waging an aggressive war in Iraq, and that their acts were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Police

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.442023

Regina v J (rape: marital exemption): Crwn 1991

(Crown Ct at Teesside) A husband was charged with having raped his wife, from whom he was living apart at the time.
Held: The charge was bad. s 1(1)(a) of the 1976 Act had the effect that the marital exemption embodied in Hale’s proposition was preserved, subject to those exceptions established by cases decided before the Act was passed. The word ‘unlawful’ in the subsection meant ‘illicit’, ie outside marriage.

Judges:

Rougier J

Citations:

[1991] 1 All ER 759

Statutes:

Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1976 1(1), Sexual Offences Act 1956 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Regina v Chapman CCA 1958
The court accepted that the word `unlawfully’ in relation to carnal knowledge had in many early statutes not been used with any degree of precision, and he referred to a number of enactments making it a felony unlawfully and carnally to know any . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v R HL 23-Oct-1991
H has no right to sexual intercourse with W – rape
The defendant appealed against his conviction for having raped his wife, saying that intercourse with his wife was necessarily lawful, and therefore outside the statutory definition of rape. Due to the matrimonial difficulties, the wife had left . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.194941

Regina v Lobell: CCA 11 Mar 1957

The court considered the different standards of proof required for civil and criminal accusations of assault.
Held: Appeal allowed. The onus of proving self-defence as a defence to murder, or a defence of ‘killing se defendendo’, was on the accused.
Lord Goddard CJ added: ‘It is a defence of justification, or, to put it in terms of pleading, a confession and avoidance. In civil cases this plea is always to be proved by the party setting it up; and it is perhaps not altogether easy to see why it should not be so in a criminal case, more especially as when self-defence is set up the facts must often be known only to the defendant who relies upon it.’

Judges:

Lord Goddard CJ

Citations:

[1957] 1 QB 547, [1957] NZPoliceLawRp 5, (1957) 8 New Zealand Police Law Reports 469, [1957] 2 WLR 524, [1957] 1 All ER 734, (1957) 41 Cr App Rep 100

Links:

NZ PLR

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – George Worme Grenada Today Limited v The Commissioner of Police PC 29-Jan-2004
PC (Grenada) The defendant was editor of a newspaper which carried a story severely defamatory of the prime minister. He was convicted of criminal libel, and appealed.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. The . .
Cited – Ashley and Another v Sussex Police CA 27-Jul-2006
The deceased was shot by police officers raiding his flat in 1998. The claimants sought damages for his estate. They had succeeded in claiming damages for false imprisonment, but now appealed dismissal of their claim for damages for assault and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 28 January 2022; Ref: scu.192653

DD and Another v Secretary of State for the Home Department: SIAC 27 Apr 2007

SIAC considered the difficulties particular to the return of nationals to Libya.

Judges:

Ouseley J

Citations:

[2007] UKSIAC 42/2005

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Lancashire County Council ex parte Huddleston CA 1986
The respondent council had failed to allocate a university student grant to the claimant and the principle was directed at the duty of that authority to state clearly the reasons for its refusal and the particular factors that had been taken into . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Crime

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.251838

Regina v Marchant and Another: CACD 21 Jul 2003

The second defendant, a farmer, employed the first defendant, inter alia, to drive his tractor. The tractor, when fitted up was necessarily dangerous, but was licensed to be driven on the roads. There was a fatal accident on the highway. The defendants appealed from convictions for causing death by dangerous driving.
Held: The Court concluded that the prosecution should not have sought a conviction on the ‘dangerous condition’ case and that the Learned Recorder should not have allowed them to do so. The appeals were allowed and the conviction quashed. Though a driver could not escape criminal liability for taking a dangerous vehicle onto the road merely because the vehicle was licensed in that condition by the Secretary of State, prosecutors should take particular care before deciding to prosecute in such circumstances.
‘in the particular circumstances of this case, some reference to the fact that this was an authorised vehicle in its ‘inherent’ condition was appropriate and indeed desirable in assisting the jury in its approach to the question whether the state of the vehicle was ‘obviously dangerous to a competent and careful driver’. Where the state of a vehicle is inherent and the vehicle is authorised for use on the road and is being used in a rural area in which agricultural machinery is frequently driven along country roads, we consider that some reference to these facts should be made to the jury. The statement that authorisation under the Regulations is no defence to the charge without more may indicate that it is of absolutely no relevance.’

The Vice President (Lord Justice Rose) Mr Justice Grigson Mr Justice Beatson
[2003] EWCA Crim 2099, [2004] 1 All ER 1187, [2004] 1 WLR 442
Bailii
Road Traffic Act 1988 1 40A 41 44, Motor Vehicles (Authorisation of Special Types) General Order 1979 13C
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Morris CACD 2002
The meaning of the word ‘obvious’ in a statute was in itself so clear that it should not be defined for a jury. . .
Cited – Regina v Strong 1995
‘obvious to a careful and competent driver’ refers to a dangerous state which would be ‘seen or realised at first glance’ . .
Cited – Wood v Milne QBD 1987
The ‘state of the vehicle’ includes the manufactured condition of the vehicle. As a matter of construction, it was not necessary to prove a lack of maintenance in order to prove a breach of the Regulations . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Road Traffic

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.184883

Shepherd v The Information Commissioner: CACD 18 Jan 2019

The defendant had been part of an organisation subject to an investigation of child sex abuse. He was cleared of involvement, but had disseminated the confidential reports containing sensitive personal data to support his contention that the process was being misused. He appealed from his conviction under the 1998 Act, saying that the burden of proof on him raising a defence was evidential, and not legal as had been applied by the court.
Held: The appeal was allowed. s.55(2) imposes no more than an evidential burden of proof.

Davis LJ, Jay J, Judge Dean QC
[2019] EWCA Crim 2, [2019] WLR(D) 32
Bailii
Data Protection Act 1998 55
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Lambert HL 5-Jul-2001
Restraint on Interference with Burden of Proof
The defendant had been convicted for possessing drugs found on him in a bag when he was arrested. He denied knowing of them. He was convicted having failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that he had not known of the drugs. The case was . .
Cited – Regina v S (Trade Mark Defence) (Roger Sliney v London Borough of Havering) CACD 20-Nov-2002
The defendant alleged that the offence of which had been convicted, under the 1994 Act, infringed his rights under article 6.2 in reversing the burden of proof.
Held: The principle that the duty of proof lay on the prosecution was subject to . .
Cited – Regina v Johnstone HL 22-May-2003
The defendant was convicted under the 1994 Act of producing counterfeit CDs. He argued that the affixing of the name of the artist to the CD was not a trade mark use, and that the prosecution had first to establish a civil offence before his act . .
Cited – Sheldrake v Director of Public Prosecutions; Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002 HL 14-Oct-2004
Appeals were brought complaining as to the apparent reversal of the burden of proof in road traffic cases and in cases under the Terrorism Acts. Was a legal or an evidential burden placed on a defendant?
Held: Lord Bingham of Cornhill said: . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Information, Human Rights

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.633288

L, Regina v: CACD 22 Jan 2015

The prosecutor appealed against the discharg eof the defendant for having a prohibited weapon, a modified Crossman 2250B carbon dioxide powered .22 calibre gun. It was not in dispute that it was a weapon, barrelled, that .22 air pellets could be discharged, and that it had sufficient power to be lethal. He said that as an air weapon it was incapable of being a prohibited firearm.
Held: The prosecutor’s appeal succeeded.

Rafferty LJ, Foskett J,Carey HHJ
[2015] EWCA Crim 5
Bailii
Firearms Act 1968
England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.572388

Pwr and Others v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 3 Apr 2020

Lord Justice Holroyde Mr Justice Swift
[2020] EWHC 798 (Admin), [2020] Crim LR 731, [2020] WLR(D) 217, [2020] 2 Cr App R 11, [2020] 1 WLR 3623
Bailii, WLRD
Terrorism Act 2000 13(1), European Convention on Human Rights, Human Rights Act 1998
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – Pwr v Director of Public Prosecutions SC 26-Jan-2022
The appellants carried a flag of the Kurdistan Workers Party, a proscribed organisation at a demonstration, and were convicted of a section 13(1) offence. The Crown Court dismissed their appeals, holding that section 13(1) created an offence of . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Human Rights

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.649806

Pwr v Director of Public Prosecutions: SC 26 Jan 2022

The appellants carried a flag of the Kurdistan Workers Party, a proscribed organisation at a demonstration, and were convicted of a section 13(1) offence. The Crown Court dismissed their appeals, holding that section 13(1) created an offence of strict liability meaning that the offence did not require knowledge of the import of the article displayed, or of its capacity to arouse reasonable suspicion that he or she was a member or supporter of a proscribed organisation, and that section 13(1) was not incompatible with the right to freedom of expression.
Held: The appeals were dismissed.
The defendant must know that he is displaying the relevant article, but no extra mental element is required beyond this. The offence is one of strict liability. The presumption for mens rea is rebutted by necessary implication from the use of the phrase reasonable suspicion, and requiring mens rea would render incoherent what is otherwise a calibrated and rational scheme of proscribed organisation offences in the 2000 Act. The Act was concerned with the effect on other people rather than the intention or knowledge of the defendant.

Lord Lloyd-Jones
Lady Arden
Lord Hamblen
Lord Burrows
Lady Rose
[2022] UKSC 2
Bailii
Terrorism Act 2000 13(1), European Convention on Human Rights 10
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Pwr and Others v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 3-Apr-2020
. .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 27 January 2022; Ref: scu.671615

Tesco Stores Ltd v Brent London Borough Council: QBD 16 Feb 1993

An employee’s actual knowledge of and information about the age of a video purchaser could properly be imputed to his employer company.

Gazette 07-Apr-1993, Times 16-Feb-1993, [1993] 1 WLR 1037
Video Recordings Act 1984 11(1) 11(2)(b)
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Interfact Ltd and Another v Liverpool City Council Admn 23-May-2005
The defendants, operators of licensed sex shops, appealed convictions for offences under the Act. The shops had supplied videos rated R*18 by mail order from the shops. The Trading Standards Officer said this did not satisfy the requirement that . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime

Updated: 26 January 2022; Ref: scu.89773

France v Regina: CACD 27 Oct 2016

The appellant had been convicted of encouraging a police officer to commit the offence of misconduct in public office by paying him for stories for the Sun newspaper.
Held: The appeal succeeded: ‘more detailed instruction as to the factors relevant to the question of the public interest were required on the facts of this case so that the jury could weigh carefully the seriousness of the breach. As part and parcel of that direction, the jury should have been directed to consider whether the information passed was so trivial or inconsequential that the public interest could not, in the particular circumstances of the case, be harmed. The reference to ‘confidential information’ in . . the written directions for the jury . . was potentially misleading: it should either have been removed or further explained. The written directions also placed the issue of ‘reasonable excuse or justification’ as part of the second element from Chapman, as if consideration of that factor was not relevant to the last element.’

Hallett VP LJ, King, Dove JJ
[2016] EWCA Crim 1588
Bailii
England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 24 January 2022; Ref: scu.570556

Qosja, Regina v: CACD 22 Sep 2016

The defendant appealed against his conviction for stalking under the 1977 Act, saying that the complainant had been put in fear on only one occasion.
Held: The appeal failed: ‘a plain and natural reading of the wording of section 4A (1)(b) (i) of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 reveals that the section is wide enough to look to incidents of violence in the future and not only to incidents giving rise to a fear of violence arising directly out of the incident in question. Nor is there any requirement for the fear to be of violence on a particular date or time in the future, or at a particular place or in a particular manner, or for there to be a specific threat of violence. There can be a fear of violence sufficient for the statute where that fear of violence is of violence on a separate and later occasion. The position can be tested simply by reference to the example of somebody saying ‘I’ll come back and get you’.’

David LJ, Carr DBE, Patterson DBE JJ
[2016] EWCA Crim 1543
Bailii
Protection from Harassment Act 1977 4A(1)(b)(i)
England and Wales

Crime

Updated: 24 January 2022; Ref: scu.570555