Ahmed, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 1673 (11 September 2024)

Ahmed, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 1673 (11 September 2024)

The statutory language of the Counter Terrorism Act 2008 is clear: 'right to use' a vehicle does not require practical access or intention, and notification requirements extend to all current contact details used or capable of being used by the registered terrorism offender. Disclosure to the jury of the fact of a prior terrorism conviction is necessary for context and does not constitute legal error or unfair prejudice.

Citation
[2024] EWCA Crim 1673
Parties
Applicant Defendant: Habib Ahmed; Respondent Crown: Rex (The Crown)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (interlocutory Application) / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Against Preparatory Hearing Orders
Outcome
Applications for extension of time and leave to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Notification Requirements for Terrorism Offenders, Interpretation of 'right to Use' a Vehicle, Disclosure of Prior Convictions to Jury, Reporting Restrictions
Criminal Law Counter Terrorism Notification Requirements for Terrorism Offenders Interpretation of 'right to Use' a Vehicle Disclosure of Prior Convictions to Jury Reporting Restrictions

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Habib Ahmed

Applicant Defendant

Rex (The Crown)

Respondent Crown

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (interlocutory Application) / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Against Preparatory Hearing Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether 'right to use' a vehicle under Counter Terrorism Act 2008 requires practical access or intention to use
  2. 2 Scope of 'contact details' required to be notified under Counter Terrorism Act 2008
  3. 3 Admissibility and extent of disclosure to jury regarding prior terrorism conviction

Ratio Decidendi

The statutory language of the Counter Terrorism Act 2008 is clear: 'right to use' a vehicle does not require practical access or intention, and notification requirements extend to all current contact details used or capable of being used by the registered terrorism offender. Disclosure to the jury of the fact of a prior terrorism conviction is necessary for context and does not constitute legal error or unfair prejudice.

Court Disposition

Applications for extension of time and leave to appeal refused.

Orders

  • Reporting restriction under section 37(1) Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 lifted for anonymised judgment publication.
  • Anonymised judgment not to be published until after conclusion of the applicant's trial or further order.