Interfact Ltd v Liverpool City Council: Admn 29 Jun 2010

The claimant had been convicted in 2005 of an offence under the 1984 Act. It later became clear that the Act failed properly to implement a European Directive and was unenforceable. The company now sought leave to appeal out of time. The case was heard along with the case of Budimir.


[2010] EWHC 1604 (Admin), [2011] 2 WLR 396




Civil Procedure Rules 52.17, Video Recordings Act 1984


England and Wales


See AlsoInterfact 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 . .

Cited by:

See AlsoRegina v Budimir and Another CACD 29-Jun-2010
The defendants sought leave to appeal out of time saying that their convictions had been under the 1984 Act which was later found to have been unenforceable for failure to comply with notification requirements under European law. The 1984 Act had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, European

Updated: 09 December 2022; Ref: scu.418446