Hammond v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 13 Jan 2004

The defendant, who had since died, had been convicted of a public order offence in that standing in a street he had displayed a range of placards opposing homosexuality. He appealed saying that the finding was an unwarranted infringement of his article 9 and article 10 rights, and that the words used were not in fact insulting.
Held: The appeal failed. Any restriction on his rights of free expression were compatible with article 10. The justices had however brought all the relevant considerations into play.They had found as a fact that the words were insulting, andthat finding was not so far outisde what might properly be concluded to allow its setting aside. The words were shprt and not intemperate. They did however associate homosexuality with immorality.


May LJ, Harrison J


[2004] EWHC 69 (Admin)




Public Order Act 1986 5, European Convention on Human Rights 9 10


CitedBrutus v Cozens HL 19-Jul-1972
The House was asked whether the conduct of the defendant at a tennis match at Wimbledon amounted to using ‘insulting words or behaviour’ whereby a breach of the peace was likely to be occasioned contrary to section 5. He went onto court 2, blew a . .
CitedNicol and Another v Director of Public Prosecutions QBD 22-Nov-1995
The defendant’s behaviour complained of must be at least unreasonable if not unlawful to found a binding over for breach of the peace. Simon Brown LJ said: ‘the court would surely not find a s.115 complaint proved if any violence likely to have been . .
CitedBibby v Chief Constable of Essex Police CA 6-Apr-2000
A bailiff sought to execute against goods in a shop against the will of the occupier. The police attended and when tempers were raised the police officer anticipated a breach of the peace by the bailiff and arrested him. He sought damages for that . .
CitedKokkinakis v Greece ECHR 25-May-1993
The defendant was convicted for proselytism contrary to Greek law. He claimed a breach of Article 9.
Held: To say that Jehovah’s Witness were proselytising criminally was excessive. Punishment for proselytising was unlawful in the . .

Cited by:

CitedAbdul and Others v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 16-Feb-2011
The defendants appealed against convictions for using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour or disorderly behaviour . . within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress. He had attended a . .
CitedDehal v Crown Prosecution Service Admn 27-Sep-2005
The appellant had been convicted under section 4 of the 1986 Act. He had been accused of attending at Luton Guruwarda and intending to cause distress. He said that he had gone only peacefully to express his true religious beliefs. He had left a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Human Rights

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.226858