Chief Constable of Bedfordshire v Golding [2015] EWHC 1875 (QB), – Judgment 30 June 2015 – Interim injunctions were granted under the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 (In Force March 2015) prohibiting the leader and deputy leader of a registered political party which espoused anti-Muslim views from carrying out certain activities in Luton such as entering any mosque or Islamic cultural centre without prior authority.

MEMBERS ONLY CONTENT! Please sign up to see it!

Comments (0)

‘Sleeping equipment’

Monday, August 17th, 2015

In the first instance decision of R v Wnek, City of Westminster MC, 20th July 2015, it was held that a tarpaulin was not sleeping equipment for the purpose of s.143 of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011.

MEMBERS ONLY CONTENT! Please sign up to see it!

Comments (0)

Data Retention

Monday, August 17th, 2015

In Catt v ACPO[2015] AC 1065 the Supreme Court held that the retention of data in relation to a peaceful protestor was justified and represented a proportionate interference with his Article 8 rights.

MEMBERS ONLY CONTENT! Please sign up to see it!

Comments (0)

Following the case of Howarth v Commmissioner of Police, the Home Office have now proposed guidance sanctioning the mass searching of groups of protestors in certain circumstances.

MEMBERS ONLY CONTENT! Please sign up to see it!

Comments (0)

Execution of duty

Friday, January 2nd, 2015

Wiltshire v DPP
Police officers had implied consent from the owners of private property to enter that property when in ‘hot pursuit’ of suspects. Therefore, officers who entered a residential garden in the early hours of the morning were in the execution of their duty and a visitor to the premises who struck one of the officers was correctly convicted of assaulting a police officer.

MEMBERS ONLY CONTENT! Please sign up to see it!

Comments (0)

R (Hicks) v CPM

Monday, June 30th, 2014

R (Hicks) v CPM [2014] HRLR 11: A pre-emptive arrest for breach of the peace must be carried out for the purpose of bringing a person before the courts in order to comply with Article 5(1)(c) of the ECHR.

MEMBERS ONLY CONTENT! Please sign up to see it!

Comments (0)

Criminal Court Procedural Issues

The following is intended as an outline only to criminal court procedure for adults, there are separate and distinct provisions in relation to children and young people under the age of 18. This section also focuses predominantly on the procedure for summary trials (cases that are tried in the magistrates court) as the majority of protest cases are heard here. See Annex A for Summary Trial Case Management Flowchart and for Summary Trial Flowchart.

MEMBERS ONLY CONTENT! Please sign up to see it!

 

The Court of Appeal declined to rule on whether Article 8 rights of trespassers could defeat the rule in McPhail v Persons Unknown and delay the making of a possession order. The claimant had wrongly conceded that Article 8 was engaged.

MEMBERS ONLY CONTENT! Please sign up to see it!

 

Comments (0)
Categories : 4. Occupations

The development of the area around the claimant’s shop constituted a change in circumstances justifying an extension of an existing injunction limiting protest against the fur trade. Since the original order being amended, there was no need for a full reconsideration of the order.

 

MEMBERS ONLY CONTENT! Please sign up to see it!

 

Comments (0)
Categories : 4. Occupations

 

The local authority sought a possession order and injunction to evict an anti-fracking protest camp at Balcombe. The Council’s initial application for a full hearing within five days was refused and the case adjourned. At the resumed hearing, the vast majority of the protestors had already left the site. An order for possession was made with a designated protest area permitted to remain.

 

MEMBERS ONLY CONTENT! Please sign up to see it!

 

Comments (0)
Categories : 4. Occupations