Christian Hacking v London Borough of Waltham Forest (UPDATED)
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 06 May 2020 |
| Court | Magistrates' Court |
1
Before District Judge (Magistrates’ Courts) Jonathan Radway
In the matter of: Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014
Hearing date: 26th and 27th February 2020 at Stratford Magistrates’ Court
Judgment date: 6th May 2020 at Thames Magistrates’ Court
BETWEEN:
Christian Hacking
Appellant
v
London Borough of Waltham Forest
Respondent
JUDGMENT (corrected1)
Mr Michael Phillips for the Appellant
Ms Kuljit Bhogal for the Respondent
APPLICATION
1. This is an appeal made by Christian Hacking (the Appellant) against a Community
Protection Notice (CPN) issued to him on 03.10.2019 by the Respondent London
Borough of Waltham Forest.
2. The Respondent opposes the appeal.
3. The grounds of appeal are
a. the Respondent’s actions violated the Appellant’s rights under Articles 9 and
10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention) and the
Human Rights Act 1998 (the HRA), and
1
In 2 paragraphs of the judgment the year was wrongly stated as 2020: it sho uld have been 2019
IN THE EAST LONDON MAGISTRATES’ COURT
2
b. the Appellant’s actions were neither of detrimental effect nor of a persistent or
continuing nature, nor did they have an adverse effect on the quality of life of
those in the locality nor was the conduct unreasonable.
BACKGROUND
4. The appellant works for CBR
2
UK, an organisation dedicated to challenging public
opinion on abortion in the UK. It seeks to educate the general public about abortion
through campaigns, talks, media appearances and public street displays. Images of
both live and dead foetuses are displayed because they say there is a no more
powerful tool to speak about the reality of abortion than these images. CBR UK were
invited to Walthamstow by one of its residents. The purpose was to inform local
people there of the reality of abortion, and highlight what they say was the local MP’s
support to liberalise it. They say the MP had whipped up opposition to their presence.
Their Walthamstow campaign ran for three weeks from Saturday 28th September
until Saturday 19th October 2019 with 7 events being held, one of which was on
Thursday 3rd October 2019 next to a well-known high street bank in the town centre;
this area has a high volume of footfall, being adjacent to the street market. The
Appellant was in charge of this event. CBR UK say the council were trying to shut
them down.
5. At the start I must make very clear this case is not about the rights and wrongs of
abortion. The issues are complex and there is a wide spectrum of different opinions
held about them. The merits of the respective arguments in the longstanding and
continuing public debate about abortion are not the concern of this court. The case is
about what restrictions can properly be placed on people wanting to express views
with which others disagree. The sole issue for the court is whether or not the CPN
issued by the Respondent is lawful.
THE NOTICE
6. The CPN appealed in this case was issued to the Appellant by Philip Connor, an
officer of the Respondent local authority, at midday on 3rd October 2019 pursuant to
its powers under section 43 of the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act
2014 (the Act). The conduct complained of as having a detrimental effect on the
quality of life of those in the locality, being persistent and continuing in nature and
2
Centre for Bio-Ethical Reform UK
To continue reading
Request your trial