CS, R v

CS, R v

The legislative scheme excludes the defence of necessity for child abduction offences under s.1 of the 1984 Act, and even if it were available, the facts did not establish an imminent threat or objectively reasonable action.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: CS
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 February 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction; Post Verdict, Pre Sentencing
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Child Abduction, Necessity Defence, Jurisdiction, Care Orders
Criminal Law Family Law Child Abduction Necessity Defence Jurisdiction Care 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 2 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

CS

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction; Post Verdict, Pre Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defence of necessity is available to a charge of child abduction under s.1 of the Child Abduction Act 1984
  2. 2 Whether the facts as advanced could amount to necessity

Ratio Decidendi

The legislative scheme excludes the defence of necessity for child abduction offences under s.1 of the 1984 Act, and even if it were available, the facts did not establish an imminent threat or objectively reasonable action.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed