R v Catherine Pearl

R v Catherine Pearl

The SHPO as imposed was unnecessary and disproportionate in relation to internet use and contact with children under 18, as the offending was limited to a single individual and there was no evidence of risk to children in general; only the employment restriction was justified.

Parties
Prosecution: Rex; Appellant: Catherine Pearl
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 July 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sexual Harm Prevention Order
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Sexual Offences, Abuse of Trust, Sentencing, Sexual Harm Prevention Orders, Proportionality of Orders
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Abuse of Trust Sentencing Sexual Harm Prevention Orders Proportionality of Orders

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

Catherine Pearl

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sexual Harm Prevention Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Sexual Harm Prevention Order (SHPO) imposed was necessary and proportionate in scope
  2. 2 Whether restrictions on internet use and contact with children under 18 were justified

Ratio Decidendi

The SHPO as imposed was unnecessary and disproportionate in relation to internet use and contact with children under 18, as the offending was limited to a single individual and there was no evidence of risk to children in general; only the employment restriction was justified.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • SHPO quashed and replaced with a new SHPO limited to prohibiting the appellant from seeking or holding any voluntary or paid employment involving authority or care of children under 18, for 10 years from 23 January 2025