Godwin, R v

There was no necessity for the Sexual Harm Prevention Order as the offending was historic, there was no evidence of recent risk, and the appellant had demonstrated good character since the offences.

Parties: Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: Francis Godwin
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 12 December 2017
Procedural Posture: Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sexual Harm Prevention Order
Outcome: appeal allowed
Legal Topics: Sexual Offences, Historic Offences, Sexual Harm Prevention Order, Necessity Test

Criminal Law Sexual Offences Historic Offences Sexual Harm Prevention Order Necessity Test

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Francis Godwin

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sexual Harm Prevention Order

Legal Issues

1 Whether the Sexual Harm Prevention Order was necessary under section 103A(2)(b) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 in light of historic offending and absence of recent risk

Ratio Decidendi

There was no necessity for the Sexual Harm Prevention Order as the offending was historic, there was no evidence of recent risk, and the appellant had demonstrated good character since the offences.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

Sexual Harm Prevention Order quashed