XBV, R. v [2025] EWCA Crim 1320 (03 September 2025)

XBV, R. v [2025] EWCA Crim 1320 (03 September 2025)

The judge was entitled to find severe psychological harm and breach of trust, justifying a category 2A starting point for sentence. The sentence of 8 years' imprisonment (after credit for plea) was not manifestly excessive. However, paragraph 6 of the SHPO, imposing polygraph and relationship notification requirements, was not supported by evidence as required by section 347A of the Sentencing Act 2020, was vague, unlimited in time, and therefore unnecessary, oppressive, and disproportionate.

Citation
[2025] EWCA Crim 1320
Parties
Respondent: Rex; Appellant: XBV
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 September 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Rape of a Child Under 13, Sexual Offences, Sentencing, Sexual Harm Prevention Order (shpo), Polygraph Requirements
Criminal Law Rape of a Child Under 13 Sexual Offences Sentencing Sexual Harm Prevention Order (shpo) Polygraph Requirements

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Respondent

XBV

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive
  2. 2 Whether the inclusion of paragraph 6 in the Sexual Harm Prevention Order (SHPO) was necessary, proportionate, and sufficiently clear

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was entitled to find severe psychological harm and breach of trust, justifying a category 2A starting point for sentence. The sentence of 8 years' imprisonment (after credit for plea) was not manifestly excessive. However, paragraph 6 of the SHPO, imposing polygraph and relationship notification requirements, was not supported by evidence as required by section 347A of the Sentencing Act 2020, was vague, unlimited in time, and therefore unnecessary, oppressive, and disproportionate.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Paragraph 6 is deleted from the Sexual Harm Prevention Order; sentence of imprisonment upheld.