Dehal v Crown Prosecution Service; Dehal v DPP
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Neutral Citation | [2005] EWHC 2154 (Admin) |
| Date | 2005 |
| Year | 2005 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court) |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
10 cases
-
Fiona James v Director of Public Prosecutions
...CPS decision to prosecute had never been raised before and it was not his role to rule on that issue, notwithstanding Dehal v CPS [2005] EWHC 2154 (Admin), Moses J. It was also too late, applying the Criminal Procedure Rules and their overriding objective, for such an issue to be raised at ......
-
R (Purdy) v DPP
...1 All ER 821, HL(E)Attorney General v Able [1984] QB 795; [1983] 3 WLR 845; [1984] 1 All ER 277Dehal v Crown Prosecution Service [2005] EWHC 2154 (Admin); 169 JP 581Director of Public Prosecutions v Stonehouse [1978] AC 55; [1977] 3 WLR 143; [1977] 2 All ER 909, HL(E)Dudgeon v United Kingdo......
-
Blum v DPP
...from this jurisdiction. He referred us to Percy v DPP [2001] EWHC Admin 1125, Hammond v DPP [2004] EWHC 69 Admin, and Dehal v CPS [2005] EWHC Admin 2154. He suggested that these authorities supported the view that, where Article 11 was engaged, the authorities of the state whether it be ......
-
Michael Overd v The Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset Constabulary
... [2001] EWHC Admin 1125, Hammond v Director of Public Prosecutions [2004] EWHC 69 (Admin) and Dehal v Crown Prosecution Service [2005] EWHC 2154 (Admin). But he also wished to compare what was said by the speakers in those cases with what was said by the Claimants in the present case with......
Request a trial to view additional results
7 books & journal articles
-
Divisional Court
...in Article 11(2) of the ECHR. The cases of Percy v DPP[2001] EWHC Admin 1125, Hammond vDPP [2004] EWHC 69, (2005)69 JCL 8 and Dehal vCPS [2005] EWHC 2154 were used to illustrate theapproach which could be taken by the court in relation to the apparentreasonableness of the appellants’ activi......
-
Any Excuse for Certainty: English Perspectives on the Defence of ‘Reasonable Excuse’
...a photograph of one of the twin towers of the WorldTrade Centre in flames and a Crescent and Star surrounded by a prohibition sign. 65 [2005] EWHC 2154, [2005] All ER (D) 152. The appellant, who was a Sikh, attended the Sikh Temple (Guruwarda) in Luton, Bedfordshire. He placed anotice on a ......
-
Allowing Free Speech and Prohibiting Persecution—A Contemporary Sophie's Choice
...test had to be satisfied. Accordingly, it is unclearas to whether this test will be regarded as the lodestar for future cases or25 [2005] EWHC 2154 (Admin), [2005] All ER (D) 152.The Journal of Criminal Law336 an arbitrary decision which further contributes to the obfuscation of thisarea o......
-
Offensive Tweeting: Criminal or Just Crass? 'Freedom Only to Speak Inoffensively is not Worth Having
...email account, and there were thousands of messages from friends attacking her on Facebook.94 89 Dehal v Crown Prosecution Service [2005] EWHC 2154 (Admin), [12] 90BBC News, < http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-19059127 > accessed 18 December 2012 91 Khan. S, “Can The Trolls Be Put Back U......
Request a trial to view additional results