Coulson & Anor v R

Coulson & Anor v R

Section 2(7) RIPA extends the 'course of transmission' to include any period during which the telecommunications system stores a communication in a manner that enables the intended recipient to access it, regardless of whether the message has already been accessed. This interpretation is supported by the statutory language, the mischief rule, and is not precluded by EU Directives, which set minimum standards but allow Member States to provide greater protection.

Parties
Appellant: Andrew Coulson; Appellant: Stuart Kuttner; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 June 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against a Preparatory Hearing Ruling on a Point of Law
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Interception of Communications, Interpretation of Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (ripa), Voicemail Hacking, Scope of 'course of Transmission', Implementation of EU Directives, Legal Certainty, Admissibility of Evidence

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 20 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andrew Coulson

Appellant

Stuart Kuttner

Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against a Preparatory Hearing Ruling on a Point of Law

  1. 1 Whether voicemail messages stored on a public telecommunications system remain 'in the course of transmission' after first access by the intended recipient under section 2(7) RIPA
  2. 2 Whether section 2(7) RIPA extends protection beyond what is required by EU Directives
  3. 3 Whether the broader interpretation of section 2(7) RIPA violates legal certainty or creates parallel offences

Ratio Decidendi

Section 2(7) RIPA extends the 'course of transmission' to include any period during which the telecommunications system stores a communication in a manner that enables the intended recipient to access it, regardless of whether the message has already been accessed. This interpretation is supported by the statutory language, the mischief rule, and is not precluded by EU Directives, which set minimum standards but allow Member States to provide greater protection.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.