Business Energy Solutions Ltd & Anor v Crown Court at Preston & Anor

Business Energy Solutions Ltd & Anor v Crown Court at Preston & Anor

Copied electronic data is 'seized property' in principle, but the duty to return is subject to a practical test of reasonable practicability; the judge did not err in accepting the Authority's evidence that segregation was not reasonably practicable; no duty exists to provide an itemised inventory of electronic...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Claimant: Business Energy Solutions Limited; Claimant: BES Commercial Electricity Limited; Claimant: Commercial Power Limited; Claimant: Andrew Pilley; Defendant: The Crown Court at Preston; Interested Party: Cheshire West and Chester Trading Standards
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 June 2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Claim for judicial review dismissed.
Legal Topics
Seizure of Electronic Data, Return of Seized Property, Reasonable Practicability, Section 53 CJPA 2001, Section 59 CJPA 2001, Duty to Provide Inventory, Alternative Remedies
Criminal Law Administrative Law Judicial Review Search and Seizure Seizure of Electronic Data Return of Seized Property Reasonable Practicability Section 53 CJPA 2001 +3 more

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 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Business Energy Solutions Limited

Claimant

BES Commercial Electricity Limited

Claimant

Commercial Power Limited

Claimant

Andrew Pilley

Claimant

The Crown Court at Preston

Defendant

Cheshire West and Chester Trading Standards

Interested Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether copied electronic data is 'seized property' subject to return under section 53 CJPA 2001
  2. 2 Whether the test of 'reasonable practicability of separation' is practical or merely technical
  3. 3 Whether the judge acted irrationally in accepting the Authority's evidence

Ratio Decidendi

Copied electronic data is 'seized property' in principle, but the duty to return is subject to a practical test of reasonable practicability; the judge did not err in accepting the Authority's evidence that segregation was not reasonably practicable; no duty exists to provide an itemised inventory of electronic documents; judicial review is not barred by alternative remedies, but the claim fails on its merits.

Court Disposition

Claim for judicial review dismissed.

Orders

  • No order for return or destruction of copied data.
  • No order for itemised inventory of electronic documents.