Leeson, R (on the application of) v DPP

Leeson, R (on the application of) v DPP

On the evidence, it was not open to the magistrates to find that a person of reasonable firmness present at the scene would fear for his safety; the facts were essentially private and did not support a public order offence.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: Carol Leeson; Defendant: Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 April 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal by Way of Case Stated / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Affray, Public Order Act 1986, Objective Test for Affray, Hypothetical Bystander
Criminal Law Public Order Affray Public Order Act 1986 Objective Test for Affray Hypothetical Bystander

Source-derived case record

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Carol Leeson

Claimant

Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal by Way of Case Stated / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an offence of affray may be committed where the likelihood of a hypothetical person of reasonable firmness being present is low
  2. 2 Whether the evidence supports a conviction for affray in private circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

On the evidence, it was not open to the magistrates to find that a person of reasonable firmness present at the scene would fear for his safety; the facts were essentially private and did not support a public order offence.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Case remitted to magistrates with direction to acquit the appellant
  • Full legal funding assessment granted