Powlesland v Director of Public Prosecutions

Powlesland v Director of Public Prosecutions

Section 12 of the Public Order Act 1986 allows police to impose conditions on processions based on reasonably possible routes, including those chosen spontaneously and not notified under section 11. The power is not limited to processions with predetermined or notified routes, and can be exercised preventively before the procession starts, provided the police reasonably believe serious disruption may result.

Parties
Claimant: Powlesland; Defendant: Director of Public Prosecutions
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 December 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal by Way of Case Stated / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Public Processions, Police Powers, Interpretation of Statutes, Notification Requirements, Freedom of Assembly
Criminal Law Public Order Public Processions Police Powers Interpretation of Statutes Notification Requirements Freedom of Assembly

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Powlesland

Claimant

Director of Public Prosecutions

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal by Way of Case Stated / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the police can impose conditions under section 12 of the Public Order Act 1986 on a procession with no predetermined or notified route
  2. 2 Whether 'proposed route' in section 12 requires notification under section 11
  3. 3 Whether a spontaneously chosen route can be a 'proposed route' for the purposes of section 12

Ratio Decidendi

Section 12 of the Public Order Act 1986 allows police to impose conditions on processions based on reasonably possible routes, including those chosen spontaneously and not notified under section 11. The power is not limited to processions with predetermined or notified routes, and can be exercised preventively before the procession starts, provided the police reasonably believe serious disruption may result.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The question in the Case Stated is answered in the affirmative: the requirement within section 12(1) that the senior police officer consider the 'route or proposed route' is satisfied even if the route is spontaneous and unpredictable.
  • Conviction upheld.