Johnston's (Stuart Lee) Application
| Jurisdiction | Northern Ireland |
| Judge | Keegan J |
| Judgment Date | 10 May 2019 |
| Neutral Citation | [2019] NIQB 47 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Northern Ireland) |
| Date | 10 May 2019 |
1
Neutral Citation No: [2019] NIQB 47
Judgment: approved by the Court for handing down
(subject to editorial corrections)*
Ref: KEE10949
Delivered: 10/05/2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN NORTHERN IRELAND
________
QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION (DIVISIONAL COURT)
________
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY STUART LEE JOHNSTON
FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW
AND IN THE MATTER OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT
(NORTHERN IRELAND) 2013
________
Before: Deeny LJ, Treacy LJ and Keegan J
________
KEEGAN J (delivering the judgment of the court)
Introduction
[1] The applicant in this case is a convicted person who is subject to indefinite
notification requirements under Part II of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 as amended
by the Criminal Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 2013. Pursuant to the leave of this
Court granted on 15 February 2019 the applicant seeks the following relief, namely:
(i) If Schedule 3A to the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (as inserted by section 1 in
Schedule 1 of the Criminal Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 2013, cannot be read
and given effect in a way that is compatible with Convention rights as
appears above, a declaration that section 1 in Schedule 1 of the Criminal
Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 2013 is outside the legislative competence of the
Northern Ireland Assembly and therefore “not law” under section 6 of the
Northern Ireland Act 1998.
(ii) An order of certiorari to bring up to this Honourable Court and quash section
1 and Schedule 1 of the Criminal Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 2013.
(iii) If section 1 and Schedule 1 of the Criminal Justice Act (Northern Ireland)
2013, cannot be read and given effect in a way that is compatible with
2
Convention rights, a declaration that the failure to provide a right of appeal
from the Crown Court in respect of the review procedure created by section 1
and Schedule 1 of the Criminal Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 2013 is not
compatible with Article 6 of the ECHR pursuant to section 4 of the Human
Rights Act 1998.
(iv) Damages for breach of the applicant’s rights under the ECHR.
(v) Such further or other relief as this Honourable Court shall deem met.
(vi) All necessary and consequential direction.
(vii) Costs.
[2] The applicant was represented by Mr McDowell QC and Mr Stuart Magee BL.
Dr McGleenan QC and Mr Philip McAteer BL appeared on behalf of the respondent,
the Department of Justice. The Attorney General and Mrs Louise Maguire also
appeared pursuant to the devolution notice issued in this case given the challenge to
the legislation. We are grateful to all counsel for their helpful written and oral
submissions.
Factual Background
[3] On 11 October 1996 the applicant was convicted after a trial by jury of rape
and indecent assault of a female (along with driving whilst disqualified and driving
without insurance). Exhibited to his affidavit of 25 September 2018 are the
sentencing remarks of the learned trial judge. The applicant was sentenced to 12
years’ imprisonment in respect of the rape, 6 years in respect of the indecent assault,
12 months in respect of driving whilst disqualified and he received a £200 fine in
respect of driving without insurance. These sentences were made concurrent with
one another. At the time of the offence on 23 September 1995 the applicant was 20
years of age and the victim was 17. In his sentencing remarks the learned judge,
having dealt with the facts of the case and the circumstances stated as follows:
“I have no doubt from your record and your behaviour
on this occasion that not only have you a strong sexual
appetite which you cannot control but you are a
dangerous and violent young man.”
[4] The applicant was released from custody on 21 November 2001. In his
affidavit the applicant confirms that he was informed by police that he was subject to
notification requirements under the relevant legislation at that time. This meant that
he was required to notify to police indefinitely his date of birth, name, home
address, bank accounts and credit cards, passport and identification documents
held. In his affidavit the applicant accepts that he did not initially notify police until
October 2002 which he says was due to the difficulty he had in securing permanent
To continue reading
Request your trial