header-logo header-logo

CRIMINAL LAW

06 September 2007
Issue: 7287 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

R v Hamilton [2007] EWCA Crim 2026, [2007] All ER (D) 99 (Aug)

The defendant admitted to taking video footage with a camera positioned so as to enable him to surreptitiously take footage up the skirts of various women. No-one saw him doing it—and the women were unaware that he was doing it.

He was charged with the common law offence of outraging public decency. It was held that it is necessary to prove two elements:

(i) that the act was of such a lewd character as to outrage public decency;

(ii) that it took place in a public place and must have been capable of being seen by two or more persons who were actually present, even if they had not actually seen it.

Issue: 7287 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll