Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Hooper: QBD 16 Feb 2005

The police applied to the court for a closure order in respect of premises they said were being used for the sale of Class A drugs. The tenant sought an adjournment, which was granted as were two later applications. On the last hearing, the police did not appear and the application was dismissed as out of time. The police appealed.
Held: To avoid a conflict, the police power to order closure under 2(6) of the 2003 Act had to be read so that s54 of the 1980 Act was not excluded. Nevertheless, s54 should not be allowed to undermine the statutory purpose of the application. Magistrates had power to adjourn an application but not beyond 14 days after the application was made. The fault in the Magistrates’ action was not in granting multiple adjournments, but in allowing adjournments beyond that period. The magistrates had taking into account matters nor relevant, and the decision was flawed.


Mitting J


Times 03-Mar-2005, [2005] EWHC 340 (Admin), [2005] 1 WLR 1995




Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003 2(6), Magistrates Courts Act 1980 54, European Convention on Human Rights 6


CitedClingham (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 . .
CitedRegina v Dudley Magistrates Court ex parte Hollis; Robert v Same Admn 25-Nov-1997
An award of costs is inevitable after a finding of statutory nuisance and such costs include cost of establishing the nuisance. ‘The wide discretion as to whether to grant an adjournment conferred by section 10 and section 54 of the Magistrates’ . .

Cited by:

CitedRegina (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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Magistrates, Human Rights

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.223452