Keogh v R. [2007] EWCA Crim 528 (07 March 2007)

Keogh v R. [2007] EWCA Crim 528 (07 March 2007)

Sections 2(3) and 3(4) of the Official Secrets Act 1989, if interpreted to impose a legal burden on the defendant to disprove knowledge or reasonable cause to believe, unjustifiably infringe the presumption of innocence under Article 6 ECHR. The prosecution can and should bear the burden of proving the defendant's state of mind. The statutory provisions must be 'read down' to impose only an evidential burden on the defendant, consistent with the Human Rights Act 1998 and the approach in section 118 of the Terrorism Act 2000.

Citation
[2007] EWCA Crim 528
Parties
Appellant: Keogh; Respondent: R
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 March 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Preliminary Ruling on Legal Burden of Proof Under Official Secrets Act 1989
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Burden of Proof, Presumption of Innocence, Official Secrets Act 1989, Article 6 ECHR, Reverse Onus, Statutory Interpretation
Criminal Law Human Rights Law Constitutional Law Burden of Proof Presumption of Innocence Official Secrets Act 1989 Article 6 ECHR Reverse Onus +1 more

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Keogh

Appellant

R

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Preliminary Ruling on Legal Burden of Proof Under Official Secrets Act 1989

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the reverse legal burden of proof imposed by sections 2(3) and 3(4) of the Official Secrets Act 1989 is compatible with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights
  2. 2 Whether the statutory provisions should be 'read down' to impose only an evidential burden on the defendant

Ratio Decidendi

Sections 2(3) and 3(4) of the Official Secrets Act 1989, if interpreted to impose a legal burden on the defendant to disprove knowledge or reasonable cause to believe, unjustifiably infringe the presumption of innocence under Article 6 ECHR. The prosecution can and should bear the burden of proving the defendant's state of mind. The statutory provisions must be 'read down' to impose only an evidential burden on the defendant, consistent with the Human Rights Act 1998 and the approach in section 118 of the Terrorism Act 2000.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Sections 2(3) and 3(4) of the Official Secrets Act 1989 must be read as imposing only an evidential burden on the defendant, not a legal burden.