Ball v Johnson [2019] EW Misc 15 (MagC) (19 October 2018)

Ball v Johnson [2019] EW Misc 15 (MagC) (19 October 2018)

There is prima facie evidence that the proposed defendant, while holding public office, may have wilfully misled the public in a manner that could amount to misconduct in public office. The allegations are not vexatious or an abuse of process. Therefore, it is a proper case for the issuance of a summons for the offences as drafted.

Citation
[2019] EW Misc 15 (MagC)
Parties
Applicant: Marcus Ball; Proposed Defendant: Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Private Prosecution Application for Summons / Application for Issuance of Summons; Decision to Issue Summons
Outcome
Summons granted; case to proceed to Crown Court for trial.
Legal Topics
Misconduct in Public Office, Private Prosecution, Political Speech, Abuse of Process
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Misconduct in Public Office Private Prosecution Political Speech Abuse of Process

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

Parties

Marcus Ball

Applicant

Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson

Proposed Defendant

Procedural Posture

Private Prosecution Application for Summons / Application for Issuance of Summons; Decision to Issue Summons

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is prima facie evidence to issue a summons for misconduct in public office against a Member of Parliament and former Mayor of London for alleged misleading statements during political campaigning
  2. 2 Whether the alleged conduct amounts to acting as a public officer and an abuse of public trust
  3. 3 Whether the prosecution is vexatious or an abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

There is prima facie evidence that the proposed defendant, while holding public office, may have wilfully misled the public in a manner that could amount to misconduct in public office. The allegations are not vexatious or an abuse of process. Therefore, it is a proper case for the issuance of a summons for the offences as drafted.

Court Disposition

Summons granted; case to proceed to Crown Court for trial.

Orders

  • Proposed defendant required to attend preliminary hearing at Westminster Magistrates' Court.
  • Case to be sent to Crown Court for trial on indictable-only charges.