header-logo header-logo

Fighting back

21 June 2007 / Chris Cuddihee
Issue: 7278 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Post Cleary, defendants are in a stronger position to challenge anonymous hearsay evidence. Chris Cuddihee explains why

The routine use of hearsay evidence in applications for anti-social behaviour orders (ASBOs) has been addressed by the Divisional Court in R (on the application of Cleary) v Highbury Corner Magistrates’ Court [2006] EWHC 1869 (Admin), [2007] 1 All ER 270. This decision was made in connection with a closure order sought by the Metropolitan Police in accordance with the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003 (ABA 2003). The decision is likely to apply to all similar forms of civil restraint order, such as ASBOs, foreign travel orders or sex offender prevention orders.

Under ABA 2003, s 2(3), when considering an application for a closure order a magistrates’ court must consider a slightly different test. The court may make a closure order “if and only if it is satisfied” that the premises are:
(i) associated with the use, production or supply of class A drugs;
(ii) associated with serious nuisance or disorder; and
(iii) that a closure order is necessary.

Carol Cleary was a tenant

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Kingsley Napley—Claire Green

Kingsley Napley—Claire Green

Firm announces appointment of chief legal officer

Weightmans—Emma Eccles & Mark Woodall

Weightmans—Emma Eccles & Mark Woodall

Firm bolsters Manchester insurance practice with double partner appointment

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Partner joins family law team inLondon

NEWS
Limited liability partnerships (LLPs) are reportedly in the firing line in Chancellor Rachel Reeves upcoming Autumn budget
The landmark Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd—along with Rukhadze v Recovery Partners—redefine fiduciary duties in commercial fraud. Writing in NLJ this week, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley analyses the implications of the rulings
Barristers Ben Keith of 5 St Andrew’s Hill and Rhys Davies of Temple Garden Chambers use the arrest of Simon Leviev—the so-called Tinder Swindler—to explore the realities of Interpol red notices, in this week's NLJ
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] has upended assumptions about who may conduct litigation, warn Kevin Latham and Fraser Barnstaple of Kings Chambers in this week's NLJ. But is it as catastrophic as first feared?
Lord Sales has been appointed to become the Deputy President of the Supreme Court after Lord Hodge retires at the end of the year
back-to-top-scroll