Director of Public Prosecutions v Hardy

Director of Public Prosecutions v Hardy

There was a prima facie case of harassment based on the evidence of persistent and intimidating conduct, and no reasonable bench could have found otherwise. The justices' decision was perverse and the case should be remitted for retrial.

Parties
Claimant: Director of Public Prosecutions; Respondent: Simon Hardy
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 October 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal by Way of Case Stated
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Harassment, Protection From Harassment Act 1997, Burden of Proof, Reasonableness of Conduct
Criminal Law Harassment Protection From Harassment Act 1997 Burden of Proof Reasonableness of Conduct

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Director of Public Prosecutions

Claimant

Simon Hardy

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal by Way of Case Stated

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the justices' decision that there was no case to answer was perverse
  2. 2 Whether the conduct amounted to harassment under Section 1 and 2 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997
  3. 3 Whether the pursuit of the course of conduct was reasonable under Section 1(3)(c)

Ratio Decidendi

There was a prima facie case of harassment based on the evidence of persistent and intimidating conduct, and no reasonable bench could have found otherwise. The justices' decision was perverse and the case should be remitted for retrial.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Case remitted to Gwynedd Justices for retrial by a different panel
  • No order for costs