The Secretary appealed against the refusal of renewal of a control order. It had been said that the secretary had failed properly to consider on the renewal whether there was sufficient evidence to justify instead a prosecution.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The formal consideration of the possibility of a prosecution was a continuing one, but was not a condition precedent to a renewal of the control order. The secretary had failed to keep the prosecution services properly up to date with associated prosecutions in Belgium, but that information would not have made a difference.
Judges:
Pill LJ, Wall LJ, Maurice Kay LJ
Citations:
[2007] EWCA Civ 459, Times 01-Jun-2007, [2007] 3 WLR 1, [2007] HRLR 27, [2007] 3 WLR 1, (2007) 151 SJLB 676
Links:
Statutes:
Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Secretary of State for the Home Department v E Admn 16-Feb-2007
The claimant challenged a control order made against him, saying that the respondent had renewed the order despite failing to keep under review the possibility of prosecuting him, and that his mental health had suffered as a result of the order and . .
Cited by:
Appeal from – Secretary of State for the Home Department v E and Another HL 31-Oct-2007
The applicant, who was subject to a control order, complained that the respondent had failed as required to keep under review the possibility of a prosecution, and had renewed the order without satisfying that requirement.
Held: The appeal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Crime
Updated: 22 November 2022; Ref: scu.252388
