F & Ors, R (On the Application Of) v Blackfriars Crown Court & Anor

F & Ors, R (On the Application Of) v Blackfriars Crown Court & Anor

The warrant was unlawful because it was too broad, permitted seizure of material not allowed by law, failed to exclude legally privileged and excluded material, and did not sufficiently identify material to be seized as required by statute. The defect invalidated the authority to enter and search the premises.

Parties
Claimants: F, J & K; First Defendant: Blackfriars Crown Court; Second Defendant: Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 April 2014
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Rolled Up Hearing (permission and Substantive Application Heard Together)
Outcome
Warrant quashed
Legal Topics
Search Warrants, Special Procedure Material, Legal Professional Privilege, Excluded Material, Conspiracy to Defraud
Criminal Law Judicial Review Search and Seizure Search Warrants Special Procedure Material Legal Professional Privilege Excluded Material Conspiracy to Defraud

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

F, J & K

Claimants

Blackfriars Crown Court

First Defendant

Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Rolled Up Hearing (permission and Substantive Application Heard Together)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the search warrant was unlawfully issued for being too broad and permitting seizure of material not allowed by law
  2. 2 Whether the warrant failed to exclude legally privileged and excluded material
  3. 3 Whether the warrant sufficiently identified material to be seized as required by statute

Ratio Decidendi

The warrant was unlawful because it was too broad, permitted seizure of material not allowed by law, failed to exclude legally privileged and excluded material, and did not sufficiently identify material to be seized as required by statute. The defect invalidated the authority to enter and search the premises.

Court Disposition

Warrant quashed

Orders

  • Warrant quashed; parties to make written submissions as to consequences of the order