||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 71 (Nov)
||Queen's Bench Division (Divisional Court)
Maurice Kay LJ and Penry-Davey J
||Daniel Pievsky (instructed by Public Interest Solicitors) for the claimants.
||Samantha Leek (instructed by the Force Solicitor, Birmingham) for the defendant.
||4 November 2005
Police - Powers - Anti-social behaviour - Authorised dispersal - Protest - Dispersal direction given for purpose other than that for which authorisation granted - Whether power to disperse applying to protests - Whether direction unlawful - , s 30.
Section30 of the did, by necessary implication, apply to protests. There was no reason why a dispersal direction under s30(4) could not be issued for a purpose other than that for which the relevant authorisation order under s30(1) had been made, particularly as issuance of the direction was subject to the constraints in s30(3), the requirements of proportionality and other normal public law criteria.
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary