public nuisance and outraging public decency - Law Commission

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Evidence Base (for summary sheets) [Use this space (with a recommended maximum of 30 pages) to set out the evidence, analysis and detailed narrative from which you have generated your policy options or proposal. Ensure that the information is organised in such a way as to explain clearly the summary information on the preceding pages of this form.] 80
PROBLEMS UNDER CONSIDERATION Existing law Public nuisance Very broadly, public nuisance is any unwarranted conduct that affects the safety or comfort of the public, either in general or in a given area. One established definition is: A person is guilty of a public nuisance (also known as common nuisance), who (a) does an act not warranted by law, or (b) omits to discharge a legal duty, if the effect of the act or omission is to endanger the life, health, property or comfort of the public, or to obstruct the public in the exercise or enjoyment of rights common to all Her Majesty's subjects. It can be divided roughly between environmental nuisances (pollution, noise, obstructions) and behavioural nuisances (offensive behaviour in public). In some cases, especially those concerning noise, the two will overlap. Examples of public nuisance are: (1) obstructing the highway; (2) blasting and quarrying near built-up areas; (3) allowing land to be used as a dump, creating a dangerous or noxious environment; (4) noisy parties and “raves”; (5) bomb hoaxes and false calls to the emergency services; (6) hanging from motorways and bridges, for example in political demonstrations; (7) keeping pumas in a domestic garden; (8) gang activity involving drug dealing in an urban area. 1 Public nuisance can be used in three ways. First, as a criminal offence: it is only this aspect with which we are concerned in this project. Secondly, an individual particularly affected by a public nuisance can sue in tort. Thirdly, the Attorney General, the local authority or the person affected can apply for an injunction. 1 The significance of this last example is not that those responsible are prosecuted for public nuisance (there are more appropriate offences) but that injunctions can be granted. 81
Page 1:
The Law Commission Consultation Pap
Page 4 and 5:
CODE OF PRACTICE ON CONSULTATION T
Page 6 and 7:
PART 5: CRITICISMS AND PROPOSALS: T
Page 8 and 9:
issues of public policy at stake ma
Page 10 and 11:
(3) improve the clarity of the law
Page 12 and 13:
2.3 The legal effect of a public nu
Page 14 and 15:
classification. 26 In that sense, p
Page 16 and 17:
and Hogan appears to suggest. The f
Page 18 and 19:
2.22 One kind of public nuisance, a
Page 20 and 21:
to say that the defendants’ condu
Page 22 and 23:
done was reasonably required given
Page 24 and 25:
esponsible for a nuisance caused by
Page 26 and 27:
the Attorney General’s office tha
Page 28 and 29:
(fb) artificial light emitted from
Page 30 and 31:
(9) Sending items purporting to be
Page 32 and 33:
(not believed, or was reckless, or
Page 34 and 35:
PART 3 OUTRAGING PUBLIC DECENCY: TH
Page 36 and 37: … I think that the objections to
Page 38 and 39: 3.8 Knuller lists further instances
Page 40 and 41: 3.15 In Knuller, however, there was
Page 42 and 43: “which fills the onlooker with lo
Page 44 and 45: the act, the case illustrates a fur
Page 46 and 47: that the conventional wording, as u
Page 48 and 49: when the publisher is incapable for
Page 50 and 51: New Zealand 3.46 The Crimes Act 196
Page 52 and 53: PART 4 CRITICISMS AND PROPOSALS: TH
Page 54 and 55: Rule of law 4.8 Lord Bingham devote
Page 56 and 57: 4.15 However, as we have seen, the
Page 58 and 59: does not offend against those princ
Page 60 and 61: Like other offences with an environ
Page 62 and 63: 4.43 We provisionally propose that
Page 64 and 65: instated as the fault element in wh
Page 66 and 67: 5.13 We do not regard the differenc
Page 68 and 69: whether or not they intended or rea
Page 70 and 71: allowing the Attorney General to br
Page 72 and 73: suitable for a regulatory approach;
Page 74 and 75: importance, the jury can always fin
Page 76 and 77: problematic. 5 There is force in Sp
Page 78 and 79: Sentencing 6.16 As with public nuis
Page 80 and 81: (3) to amend the Criminal Law Act 1
Page 82 and 83: Department /Agency: Law Commission
Page 84 and 85: Summary: Analysis & Evidence Policy
Page 88 and 89: The outlines of the offence were cl
Page 90 and 91: this is uncommon: one water authori
Page 92 and 93: other procedures are inadequate; an
Page 94 and 95: Cost/benefit analysis summary Optio
Page 96 and 97: SPECIFIC IMPACT TESTS Legal Aid: It
show all

public nuisance and outraging public decency - Law Commission

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?