W, R v

W, R v

Section 17 of RIPA does not prevent evidence or questions in criminal proceedings as to whether a telecommunications system is public or private, nor does it prevent evidence or questions as to whether an interception on a private system was carried out by or with the consent of the controller. This applies to events both before and after RIPA came into force, subject to the facts of a particular case. The judge's ruling to the contrary was wrong.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Defendant: W
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 June 2003
Procedural Posture
Criminal Reference / Attorney General's Reference Under Section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1972
Outcome
Reference answered; judge's ruling overturned; questions to be referred to the House of Lords.
Legal Topics
Interception of Communications, Admissibility of Evidence, Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (ripa), Interception of Communications Act 1985, Public Vs Private Telecommunications Systems, Consent to Interception, Section 17 RIPA, Section 9 Interception of Communications Act 1985
Criminal Law Evidence Telecommunications Law Human Rights Interception of Communications Admissibility of Evidence Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (ripa) Interception of Communications Act 1985 +4 more

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 5 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

W

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Reference / Attorney General's Reference Under Section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1972

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does section 17(1) of RIPA prevent evidence or questions in criminal proceedings as to whether a telecommunications system is public or private?
  2. 2 Is the answer different if the evidence relates to events before RIPA came into force?
  3. 3 Is it permissible to ask or adduce evidence as to whether an interception on a private system was carried out by or with the consent of the controller, both before and after RIPA?

Ratio Decidendi

Section 17 of RIPA does not prevent evidence or questions in criminal proceedings as to whether a telecommunications system is public or private, nor does it prevent evidence or questions as to whether an interception on a private system was carried out by or with the consent of the controller. This applies to events both before and after RIPA came into force, subject to the facts of a particular case. The judge's ruling to the contrary was wrong.

Court Disposition

Reference answered; judge's ruling overturned; questions to be referred to the House of Lords.

Orders

  • Section 17 of RIPA does not prevent evidence or questions as to whether a telecommunications system is public or private.
  • Section 17 of RIPA does not prevent evidence or questions as to whether an interception on a private system was carried out by or with the consent of the controller, both before and after RIPA came into force, subject to the facts of a particular case.