Bucknell v DPP

Bucknell v DPP

On the facts, the apparent characteristics and mere presence of the groups alone were not capable, objectively, of giving rise to the necessary reasonable belief required by section 30(3) of the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003. The conviction was not justified on the evidence.

Parties
Claimant: Marc Bucknell; Defendant: DPP
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 July 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal by Way of Case Stated
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Anti Social Behaviour, Police Powers, Dispersal Orders, European Convention on Human Rights Article 11
Criminal Law Human Rights Law Anti Social Behaviour Police Powers Dispersal Orders European Convention on Human Rights Article 11

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

Parties

Marc Bucknell

Claimant

DPP

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal by Way of Case Stated

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the facts proved were capable of giving rise to the necessary reasonable belief by the constable under section 30(3) of the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003
  2. 2 Whether the conviction under section 32(2) of the 2003 Act was justified on the evidence

Ratio Decidendi

On the facts, the apparent characteristics and mere presence of the groups alone were not capable, objectively, of giving rise to the necessary reasonable belief required by section 30(3) of the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003. The conviction was not justified on the evidence.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Conviction quashed
  • Justices' question answered in the negative