Dryzner & Anor, R v

Dryzner & Anor, R v

The provisions of the Video Recordings Act 1984 are lawful, necessary, justified for the protection of health and morals, and fall within the qualifications of article 36 TFEU and article 10(2) ECHR; leave to appeal is refused.

Parties
Applicant: Ewa Dryzner; Applicant: Play Media Distribution Limited; Respondent: Crown; Respondent: Treasury Solicitor
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 November 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
renewed applications for leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Video Recordings Classification, Freedom of Expression, Trade Restrictions, Public Morality

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ewa Dryzner

Applicant

Play Media Distribution Limited

Applicant

Crown

Respondent

Treasury Solicitor

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction

  1. 1 Whether section 9 of the Video Recordings Act 1984 breaches article 34 of the Treaty on the Functioning of Europe
  2. 2 Whether section 9 of the Video Recordings Act 1984 is incompatible with article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights
  3. 3 Whether the classification regime is disproportionate and infringes rights under article 10 ECHR

Ratio Decidendi

The provisions of the Video Recordings Act 1984 are lawful, necessary, justified for the protection of health and morals, and fall within the qualifications of article 36 TFEU and article 10(2) ECHR; leave to appeal is refused.

Court Disposition

renewed applications for leave to appeal refused

Orders

  • No order as to costs