Forbes v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 11 Jul 2006

The defendant had been placed on the sex offenders’ register on conviction for fraudulent evasion of prohibitions on importing goods, by importing indecent photographs of children. He had maintained that he had not known of the exact nature of the content.
Held: The objective of the notification requirements was the protection of children, and was both an elementary requirement, and one required under international convention. The offence was not an absolute one, but to require exact knowledge of the contents imported would nullify the section. The notification requirement did not infringe the appellant’s human rights: ‘the extent of the interference with the rights of an individual responsible for a prohibited importation of indecent material involving children who becomes subject to the statutory notification requirements is not disproportionate. ‘
Igor Judge P
[2006] EWCA Civ 962, Times 11-Aug-2006, [2006] 1 WLR 3075
Bailii
Sex Offenders Act 1997, European Convention on Human Rights, Customs and Excise management Act 1979 172(b)
England and Wales
Citing:
See AlsoRegina v Forbes (Giles) HL 20-Jul-2001
The defendant had been convicted of evading a prohibition on importing articles of an obscene or indecent nature. He had been unaware of whether the articles were indecent images of children, or otherwise obscene images. Since the provisions which . .
CitedAdamson v United Kingdom ECHR 1999
The Court considered whether the notification requirements of the UK sex offenders’ registration scheme constitute a penalty for the purposes of Article 7 or infringed the applicant’s rights under Article 8.
Held: They did not. As to article . .
CitedJackson and others v Attorney General HL 13-Oct-2005
The applicant sought to challenge the 2004 Hunting Act, saying that it had been passed under the provisions of the 1949 Parliament Act which was itself an unlawful extension of the powers given by the 1911 Parliament Act to allow the House of . .
CitedRegina v British Broadcasting Corporation ex parte Pro-life Alliance HL 15-May-2003
The Alliance was a political party seeking to air its party election broadcast. The appellant broadcasters declined to broadcast the film on the grounds that it was offensive, being a graphical discussion of the processes of abortion.
Held: . .
AdoptedGallagher, Re an Application By for Judicial Review QBNI 9-Apr-2003
The applicant had been convicted of offences of indecent assault. He contended that the notification requirements of the 1997 Act infringed his rights under Article 8.
Held: The court rejected the claim: ‘The task of deciding whether the . .

Cited by:
CitedF and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 21-Apr-2010
The defendants had been convicted and sentenced for offences which under the 2003 Act would mean that they stayed permanently on the Sex Offenders’ register without possibility of a review. The Secretary of State appealed aganst a finding that the . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 February 2021; Ref: scu.243070