Plymouth City Council v ABC [2022] EWHC 2426 (Ch) (30 September 2022)

Plymouth City Council v ABC [2022] EWHC 2426 (Ch) (30 September 2022)

The court has no jurisdiction to consider the defendant's new argument based on the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992 after the order was perfected. Even if it did, the Act does not apply to these proceedings as there is no allegation of a relevant offence within the meaning of the Act, nor is there a likelihood of identification as a victim of such an offence.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 2426 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Plymouth City Council; Defendant: ABC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil (business and Property Courts) / Supplementary Judgment on Issue Arising From Refusal of Anonymity; Post Perfected Order, Considering Permission to Appeal
Outcome
Application refused; supplementary judgment issued in anonymised form for pending appeal.
Legal Topics
Anonymity in Proceedings, Sexual Offences (amendment) Act 1992, Jurisdiction to Reconsider Orders, Reporting Restrictions, Appeal Grounds
Civil Procedure Employment Law Privacy Law Anonymity in Proceedings Sexual Offences (amendment) Act 1992 Jurisdiction to Reconsider Orders Reporting Restrictions Appeal Grounds

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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plymouth City Council

Claimant

ABC

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (business and Property Courts) / Supplementary Judgment on Issue Arising From Refusal of Anonymity; Post Perfected Order, Considering Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992 requires anonymity for the defendant in these proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the court has jurisdiction to consider a new ground (based on the 1992 Act) after judgment and perfected order
  3. 3 Whether the facts of the case engage the statutory anonymity provisions

Ratio Decidendi

The court has no jurisdiction to consider the defendant's new argument based on the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992 after the order was perfected. Even if it did, the Act does not apply to these proceedings as there is no allegation of a relevant offence within the meaning of the Act, nor is there a likelihood of identification as a victim of such an offence.

Court Disposition

Application refused; supplementary judgment issued in anonymised form for pending appeal.

Orders

  • Defendant not entitled to raise the 1992 Act at this stage.
  • No anonymity order granted under the 1992 Act.