Elements of the criminal records check disclosure arrangements were unlawful
R (P & A) v Secretary of State for Justice & Anor  EWHC 89 (Admin)
- Related Member(s):
- Hugh Southey QC, Nick Armstrong
- Related Practice Area(s):
- Crime and Regulatory Law, Human Rights
- Queen’s Bench Division (Administrative Court)
The claimants brought judicial review proceedings, seeking a declaration that the scheme under the Police Act 1997, Part V and the as amended by the Police Act (Criminal Records Certificates: Relevant Matters) (Amendment) (England and Wales) Order 2013 (SI 2013/1200) contravened ECHR, art 8. They also sought a declaration that the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 (Exceptions) Order 1975 (SI 1975/1023), as amended by the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act (Exceptions) Order 1975 (Amendment) (England and Wales) Order 2013 (SI 2013/1198) was contrary to art 8, and therefore ultra vires.
The court found that part of the new arrangements for criminal records checks were unlawful, despite alterations made following the judgment in T v Chief Constable of Manchester  UKSC 35 . The court considered that the changes still required too much disclosure, as despite narrowing the circumstances in which full disclosure of criminal records was required, full disclosure was still required in many situations, including in the case where individuals had more than one conviction.
Hugh Southey QC and Nick Armstrong were involved in this case.