Hamer, R. v

Hamer, R. v

There was no valid application before the judge as the application to vary the SOPO was not made by a person specified in s.108(2) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003; therefore, the judge had no power to vary the SOPO or impose a SHPO.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Respondent: R; Appellant: Robert HAMER
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Sexual Offences, Sentencing, Variation of Orders, Jurisdiction
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Sentencing Variation of Orders Jurisdiction

Source-derived case record

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

R

Respondent

Robert HAMER

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge had power to make a Sexual Harm Prevention Order (SHPO) or amend a Sexual Offences Prevention Order (SOPO) and call it a SHPO
  2. 2 Whether the application to vary the SOPO was valid under s.108(2) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003

Ratio Decidendi

There was no valid application before the judge as the application to vary the SOPO was not made by a person specified in s.108(2) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003; therefore, the judge had no power to vary the SOPO or impose a SHPO.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order dated 15 June 2016 headed 'SHPO' set aside
  • SOPO dated 27 February 2015 to continue in unamended form