Haw, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another: CA 8 May 2006

References: [2006] EWCA Civ 532, Times 15-May-2006, [2006] 3 WLR 40, [2006] QB 780
Links: Bailii
Coram: Lord Justice Laws Lady Justice Hallett Lord Justice Clarke
Ratio: The applicant had demonstrated continuously against the war in Iraq from the pavement outside the House of Commons. The respondent sought an order for his removal under the law preventing demonstrations near Parliament without consent which was passed after the demonstrations began. He said that the demonstration was a continuing one, and the the Act was not retrospective so as to control it.
Held: The court declined to apply the literal interpretation of the statute: ‘if the literal construction of the references to ‘starts’ or ‘start’ leads to the conclusion that the Act does not apply to any demonstration commenced before the relevant provisions of the Act came into force, leaving such a demonstration unregulated by any statute at all because of the disapplication of section 14 of the 1986 Act in section 132(6) of the Act, we would not give it that literal construction but would construe it as we have indicated. ‘
Statutes: Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case cites:

  • Cited – McMonagle v Westminster City Council HL ([1990] 2 AC 716, [1990] 1 All ER 993)
    The House treated words as surplusage in a statute which contained criminal sanctions in order to avoid the substantial frustration of the object of the Act. Words in an Act are not to be rendered ‘insensible, absurd or ineffective to achieve its . .
  • Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment Transport and the Regions and another, ex parte Spath Holme Limited HL (Times 13-Dec-00, Gazette, House of Lords, Bailii, [2000] UKHL 61, [2001] 2 AC 349, [2001] 1 All ER 195, [2001] 2 WLR 15, (2001) 33 HLR 31, [2000] NPC 139, [2000] EGCS 152, [2000] EG 152, [2001] 1 EGLR 129)
    The section in the 1985 Act created a power to prevent rent increases for tenancies of dwelling-houses for purposes including the alleviation of perceived hardship. Accordingly the Secretary of State could issue regulations whose effect was to limit . .
  • Cited – Regina v Bristol Magistrates Court ex parte E CA ([1998] 3 All ER 798)
    Simon Brown LJ said: ‘It is a principle of legal policy that a person should not be penalised except under clear law.’ . .
  • Cited – Liversidge v Sir John Anderson HL ([1942] AC 206, Bailii, [1941] UKHL 1, [1941] 3 All ER 338)
    The plaintiff sought damages for false imprisonment. The Secretary of State had refused to disclose certain documents. The question was as to the need for the defendant to justify the use of his powers by disclosing the documents.
    Held: The . .
  • Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v McKeown and Jones HL (Times 21-Feb-97, House of Lords, Bailii, [1997] UKHL 4, [1997] 1 All ER 737, [1997] 1 WLR 295, [1997] 2 Cr App Rep 155, [1997] Crim LR 522)
    A driver was arrested for driving with excess alcohol. At the police station, he was to be tested with the Lion Intoximeter. The officer tested the machine and it calibrated correctly. This was at about a quarter after midnight; the sergeant’s watch . .

(This list may be incomplete)

Last Update: 05 November 2019
Ref: 241544