RHE’s New Photo Reporting App 15th July 2019 Reportable Regulatory Excellence Awards 2019 12th July 2019 RIAMS New RIAMS App Coming Soon 11th July 2019 RIAMS RHE’s Annual Housing Conference 2019 9th July 2019 Training Stay up to Date and Don’t Miss a Thing 4th July 2019 RIAMS Successfully Using The Noise App in Court 27th June 2019 The Noise App Trading Standards Bundle Prices Now Available 26th June 2019 RIAMS Get Your Training Delivered In-House 26th June 2019 Training Reviewing the CTSI Symposium 2019 26th June 2019 RIAMS Come and see us at CIH Conference 25th June 2019 The Noise App Welcoming our Spring Subscribers 21st June 2019 The Noise App Requiring Flood Prevention when Issuing Improvement Notices 19th June 2019 RIAMS Sponsoring the John Connell Awards 2019 12th June 2019 The Noise App New Animal Health Library Now Available 11th June 2019 RIAMS New Trainers Wanted 5th June 2019 Training Launching our new Animal Health Library at the CTSI Symposium   5th June 2019 RIAMS CIEH Noise Survey 2019 4th June 2019 The Noise App Last Chance to Book Your Place on the Improving Food Safety Conference 4th June 2019 Training Join our Mailing List for Updates Straight to Your Inbox 30th May 2019 RIAMS New RIAMS User Guides Now Available 28th May 2019 RIAMS Refresh Your Investigation Skills with RHE 23rd May 2019 Training How Can RIAMS Help with Tackling Noise Nuisance? 22nd May 2019 RIAMS Using The Noise App to Tackle Complaints 21st May 2019 The Noise App Noise Action Week Begins 21st May 2019 The Noise App

Key Considerations When Issuing Community Protection Notices

27th March 2019 RIAMS

The latest digest in the Legal and Enforcement community covers the first case where the High Court has considered the use of Community Protection Notices (CPNs) under Section 43 of the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act of 2014. Community moderator, Tim Everett identifies two key principles: 

  1. It is not necessary to prove a CPN was valid in prosecuting for a breach of one of its terms. Any such challenge should be raised on appeal when it is served.
  2. The issuing authority has an implied power to vary or discharge a CPN on an application from the recipient.

In deciding this case, the Court set out how authorities should use these implied powers, reaffirmed that CPNs should be time-limited and any terms attached to them should be proportionate.

The District Judge found the offence proved but she was asked to allow an appeal on a point of law to the High Court. Three questions were posed:

  1. Did she have to be satisfied as to the legality or reasonableness of the CPN?
  2. Did a CPN have the same standing as an order of the court until varied or set aside?
  3. Did the prosecution have to prove the issue of the CPN was justified?

In considering these questions, the High Court decided that:

  1. No, the Magistrates’ Court did not have to satisfy itself as to the validity of the CPN.
  2. Yes, the CPN did have the same standing as a court order in that it remains valid and must be complied with until varied or discharged.
  3. No, the prosecution did not have to call evidence as to the service of the CPN on a charge relating to its breach.

To read the full digest, click here.

You must be signed into RIAMS Communities to read the full post; UK local authority employees can sign in or create an account for free.