Jose, R. v

Jose, R. v

The restraining order was not justified as the judge did not make findings of necessity or likelihood of harassment, nor did he apply the correct legal test as required by section 5A and relevant case law.

Parties
Appellant: Jinny Jose; Respondent: The Crown
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 May 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Restraining Order After Acquittal
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Restraining Orders, Harassment, Acquittal, Protection From Harassment Act 1997

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

Jinny Jose

Appellant

The Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Restraining Order After Acquittal

  1. 1 Whether the restraining order under section 5A of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 was necessary after acquittal
  2. 2 Whether the factual basis for imposing the restraining order was established

Ratio Decidendi

The restraining order was not justified as the judge did not make findings of necessity or likelihood of harassment, nor did he apply the correct legal test as required by section 5A and relevant case law.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • restraining order quashed