AY, R. v

AY, R. v

The defence of reasonable excuse under section 58(3) Terrorism Act 2000 may include the defendant's purpose in possessing the material, including for the purpose of lawful self-defence or defence of others, and this is a matter for the jury unless it is incapable of being held to be reasonable. The judge was correct...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: The Queen; Respondent: AY
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 April 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Interlocutory Appeal From Preparatory Hearing Ruling
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Reasonable Excuse Defence, Possession of Terrorist Materials, Self Defence in Terrorism Offences
Criminal Law Terrorism Law Reasonable Excuse Defence Possession of Terrorist Materials Self Defence in Terrorism Offences

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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen

Appellant

AY

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Interlocutory Appeal From Preparatory Hearing Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defence of reasonable excuse under section 58(3) Terrorism Act 2000 can include possession for the purpose of lawful self-defence or defence of others
  2. 2 Whether the defendant's purpose in possessing the material is relevant to the statutory defence

Ratio Decidendi

The defence of reasonable excuse under section 58(3) Terrorism Act 2000 may include the defendant's purpose in possessing the material, including for the purpose of lawful self-defence or defence of others, and this is a matter for the jury unless it is incapable of being held to be reasonable. The judge was correct not to withdraw this element of the defence from the jury.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The judge's ruling is upheld; the defence of reasonable excuse including purpose of self-defence may be left to the jury.