The appellant had been served with a Community Protection Notice (CPN) by a police officer pursuant to s 43 of the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014. It contained four prohibitions, including not to enter the area of Reading Town Centre as defined by a map (which formed part of the CPN), unless there was a prearranged appointment with a court or probation worker. Under s 46(2) of the 2014 Act, a person issued with a CPN has 21 days to appeal to a magistrates' court on various grounds, including that any of the requirements in the notice, or any periods within which or times by which they are to be complied with, are unreasonable. The appellant did not exercise his right of appeal. Some five days after the issue of the CPN, he was observed in the prohibited area in Reading Town Centre and arrested by the police. He subsequently appeared before a District Judge having been charged with the summary offence of failing to comply with a CPN contrary to s 48(1) of the 2014 Act. It was submitted on his behalf that there was no case to answer because the CPN was invalid on account of its indefinite duration, and a term which prohibited the appellant from being in a group of 3 or more individuals including himself. Both, it was argued, were unreasonably wide, unnecessary and disproportionate. Applying the principles stated in R v Galbraith [1981] 1 WLR 1038, the District Judge found that there was a case to answer. Moreover, in reliance upon Director of Public Prosecutions v T [2007] 1 WLR 209, and other 'settled case law', she held that the validity of the CPN could not be raised by way of defence to a criminal prosecution for its breach. Having found that the CPN was in force at the relevant time, and that it had been breached, the District Judge concluded that the appellant was guilty of a s 48(1) offence.In the present appeal by way of case stated, the central issue for the Divisional Court to determine was whether it was open to a defendant charged with breaching a CPN to argue by way of defence that the notice was invalid.Held, dismissing the appeal, that as a matter of statutory construction, it was clear that Parliament had intended that a challenge to the validity of a CPN should not be a defence in criminal proceedings for its breach. Where the subject of a CPN wished to mount a challenge, this could only be accomplished either by exercising their statutory right of appeal or by seeking judicial review. CommentaryPart 4 of the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 is concerned with 'Community protection'. Central to this is the power conferred on authorised persons, i.e. a police constable, a

The purpose of this book is to introduce the reader to the fundamental principles and concepts of constitutional and administrative law. It is highly popular with undergraduates for its clear writing style and the ease with which it guides the reader through key principles of public law. This tenth edition incorporates all significant developments in this ever-changing area of the law. The book also includes a range of useful features to help students get to grips with the subject matter. These include further reading suggestions to support deeper research, a large number of self-test questions to help reinforce knowledge, and chapter summaries and numbered paragraphs to aid navigation and revision. This new edition has been fully updated to cover all the latest developments in constitutional and administrative law, including those relating to devolution and Brexit.

No abstract

The scandal which broke over MPs' abuses of the allowances system during the course of the last parliamentary session shows little sign of abating. As a result of an audit undertaken by Sir Thomas Legg, some MPs have been required to repay sums which were successfully claimed up to five years ago. Although this development has been welcomed by the public, it has been condemned by some in Parliament as being retrospective and unfair. In this article, the discussion focuses on the key provisions of the Parliamentary Standards Act 2009 which was enacted in order to tackle the issues raised by the expenses scandal. It considers their import and how they are likely to apply in practice. Since the Act is a further example of ‘fast‐track’ legislation, there was no opportunity for pre‐legislative scrutiny. This may help to explain why the Act differs in several important respects from the Bill which was originally introduced. It is highly likely that the 2009 Act will be the subject of post‐legislative scrutiny, especially since it contains a renewal provision.

The supremacy of the constitution and the rule of law are key features of the post-apartheid legal order in South Africa. For either to have any real value, however, it is necessary that they are interpreted and applied by an independent judiciary that is free from executive influence. This important task has fallen mainly on the Constitutional Court. It has recently been called upon to rule on the lawfulness of the conduct of both the president and the National Assembly and held that both had acted unlawfully and inconsistently with the constitution. In the author's view, this ruling signifies that the maturing court is fully aware of its own constitutional obligations and that, unlike its apartheid era predecessors that were hamstrung by the supremacy of Parliament, it possesses a mandate to check the abuse of power by other branches of government.