PY, R. v (Rev 1)
Section 58 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 does not require oral notification in open court; notification by email is sufficient. The exemption under section 10(3) of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 does not apply to a police constable merely exercising a police dog, as this does not constitute 'using' the dog for a policing activity.
- Parties
- Appellant: Regina; Respondent: PY
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 22 January 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Prosecution Appeal Against Binding Ruling Under Section 58 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003
- Outcome
- appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Dangerous Dogs, Prosecution Appeals, Statutory Exemptions, Criminal Procedure
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Regina
Appellant
PY
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Prosecution Appeal Against Binding Ruling Under Section 58 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the statutory requirements for prosecution appeals under section 58 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 require oral notification in open court or permit notification by email
- 2 Whether the exemption under section 10(3) of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 applies to a police constable exercising a police dog off duty
Ratio Decidendi
Section 58 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 does not require oral notification in open court; notification by email is sufficient. The exemption under section 10(3) of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 does not apply to a police constable merely exercising a police dog, as this does not constitute 'using' the dog for a policing activity.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed
Orders
- The appeal is allowed.
- The matter is remitted to the Crown Court for proceedings to continue.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment