HER MAJESTY'S ADVOCATE v. ANDREW ALAN BLANCE & ALEXANDER GEORGE COCKBURN & WARNER KING EASTON & RYAN DAVID LOW & CHARFLES DAVID RAYNES & LEON WILLIAM WALKER [2013] ScotSC 36 (16 May 2013)

HER MAJESTY'S ADVOCATE v. ANDREW ALAN BLANCE & ALEXANDER GEORGE COCKBURN & WARNER KING EASTON & RYAN DAVID LOW & CHARFLES DAVID RAYNES & LEON WILLIAM WALKER [2013] ScotSC 36 (16 May 2013)

The statutory definition in section 2(2) of the 2012 Act is clear and exhaustive: if qualifying behaviour occurs in a qualifying location (including on a journey to or from a regulated football match), it is deemed to be 'in relation to a regulated football match'. No further causal link or motivation is required. The defence's arguments for reading in such a requirement are rejected as inconsistent with the text and purpose of the legislation.

Citation
[2013] ScotSC 36
Parties
Prosecutor: Her Majesty's Advocate; Accused: Andrew Alan Blance; Accused: Alexander George Cockburn; Accused: Warner King Easton; Accused: Ryan David Low; Accused: Charles David Raynes; Accused: Leon William Walker
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
16 May 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Preliminary Issue/debate on Relevancy
Outcome
defence preliminary issues refused
Legal Topics
Offensive Behaviour at Football Matches, Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (scotland) Act 2012, Statutory Construction, Public Order Offences
Criminal Law Statutory Interpretation Offensive Behaviour at Football Matches Offensive Behaviour at Football and Threatening Communications (scotland) Act 2012 Statutory Construction Public Order Offences

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty's Advocate

Prosecutor

Andrew Alan Blance

Accused

Alexander George Cockburn

Accused

Warner King Easton

Accused

Ryan David Low

Accused

Charles David Raynes

Accused

Leon William Walker

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Preliminary Issue/debate on Relevancy

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused's behaviour was 'in relation to a regulated football match' under section 1(1) of the 2012 Act
  2. 2 Whether a causal link is required between the behaviour and the football match for the statutory offence

Ratio Decidendi

The statutory definition in section 2(2) of the 2012 Act is clear and exhaustive: if qualifying behaviour occurs in a qualifying location (including on a journey to or from a regulated football match), it is deemed to be 'in relation to a regulated football match'. No further causal link or motivation is required. The defence's arguments for reading in such a requirement are rejected as inconsistent with the text and purpose of the legislation.

Court Disposition

defence preliminary issues refused

Orders

  • Refusal of the minutes raising preliminary issues under section 79(2)(b)(vi) of the 1995 Act.
  • Preliminary objections under section 79(2)(b)(ii) and section 255 of the 1995 Act remain extant, requiring the Crown to lead evidence on the special capacity.