Pinheiro, R (On the Application Of) v North Tyneside Magistrates Court & Anor (Rev1) [2022] EWHC 1176 (Admin) (17 May 2022)

Pinheiro, R (On the Application Of) v North Tyneside Magistrates Court & Anor (Rev1) [2022] EWHC 1176 (Admin) (17 May 2022)

There was no realistic prospect of success for the judicial review claim because the Crown Court's decision to uphold the ISROs was supported by sufficient evidence, properly applied statutory criteria and guidance, and the claimant had alternative remedies available which were not pursued; no public law error or disproportionality was established.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 1176 (Admin)
Parties
Claimant: Anderson Pinheiro; First Defendant: North Tyneside Magistrates Court; Second Defendant: Crown Court at Newcastle; First Interested Party: Chief Constable of Northumbria Police; Second Interested Party: Crown Prosecution Service
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Permission Application
Outcome
Permission for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Sexual Risk Orders, Judicial Review, Interim Orders, Article 8 ECHR, Alternative Remedy, Proportionality
Criminal Law Public Law Human Rights Sexual Risk Orders Judicial Review Interim Orders Article 8 ECHR Alternative Remedy +1 more

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anderson Pinheiro

Claimant

North Tyneside Magistrates Court

First Defendant

Crown Court at Newcastle

Second Defendant

Chief Constable of Northumbria Police

First Interested Party

Crown Prosecution Service

Second Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Permission Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Crown Court's decision to uphold interim sexual risk orders (ISROs) was flawed in public law terms
  2. 2 Whether there was sufficient evidence to justify the ISROs under the Sexual Offences Act 2003
  3. 3 Whether the ISROs were necessary and proportionate, particularly regarding the claimant's relationship with Y

Ratio Decidendi

There was no realistic prospect of success for the judicial review claim because the Crown Court's decision to uphold the ISROs was supported by sufficient evidence, properly applied statutory criteria and guidance, and the claimant had alternative remedies available which were not pursued; no public law error or disproportionality was established.

Court Disposition

Permission for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Application for permission for judicial review is refused
  • Anonymity order granted prohibiting publication of names or identifying details of Z, Y, or S