DPP v McConnell [2016] NIMag 1 (5 January 2016)

DPP v McConnell [2016] NIMag 1 (5 January 2016)

The defendant's statements, while offensive, did not reach the high threshold of being 'grossly offensive' required for criminal liability under section 127(1) of the Communications Act 2003. The statements were protected by Articles 9 and 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and the criminal law should...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2016] NIMag 1
Parties
Prosecution: Director of Public Prosecutions; Defendant: James McConnell
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
05 January 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Trial Judgment
Outcome
acquittal
Legal Topics
Grossly Offensive Communications, Freedom of Expression, Freedom of Religion, Threshold for Criminal Liability, Proportionality
Criminal Law Human Rights Law Communications Law Grossly Offensive Communications Freedom of Expression Freedom of Religion Threshold for Criminal Liability Proportionality

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Director of Public Prosecutions

Prosecution

James McConnell

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant sent or caused to be sent a grossly offensive message via a public electronic communications network contrary to section 127(1) of the Communications Act 2003
  2. 2 Whether the defendant's statements were protected by Articles 9 and 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights
  3. 3 Whether the threshold of 'grossly offensive' was met in the context of the defendant's sermon

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant's statements, while offensive, did not reach the high threshold of being 'grossly offensive' required for criminal liability under section 127(1) of the Communications Act 2003. The statements were protected by Articles 9 and 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and the criminal law should not censor offensive utterances.

Court Disposition

acquittal