header-logo header-logo

Police

26 May 2011
Issue: 7467 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

R (on the application of GC) v Metropolitan Police Commissioner [2011] UKSC 21, [2011] All ER (D) 167(May)

The fundamental feature of s 64(1A) of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 was that it gave the police the power to retain and use data from suspects for the stated statutory purposes of preventing crime, investigation of offences and the conduct of prosecutions. But that did not justify a blanket or disproportionate practice. Neither indefinite retention nor indiscriminate retention could properly be said to be fundamental features of s 64(1A). Section 64(1A) clearly delimited the exercise of the discretion of the police to retain DNA data.

Such discretion had to be exercised to enable the data to be used for the statutory purposes and had to be exercised in a way which was proportionate and rationally connected to the achievement of those purposes. Parliament did not intend for there to be a scheme of indefinite retention in all cases. It intended that there would be a proportionate scheme which gave effect to the statutory purposes and which was compatible

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

Birketts—trainee cohort

Birketts—trainee cohort

Firm welcomes new cohort of 29 trainee solicitors for 2025

Keoghs—four appointments

Keoghs—four appointments

Four partner hires expand legal expertise in Scotland and Northern Ireland

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Real estate team in Yorkshire welcomes new partner

NEWS
Robert Taylor of 360 Law Services warns in this week's NLJ that adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) risks entrenching disadvantage for SME law firms, unless tools are tailored to their needs
From oligarchs to cosmetic clinics, strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) target journalists, activists and ordinary citizens with intimidating legal tactics. Writing in NLJ this week, Sadie Whittam of Lancaster University explores the weaponisation of litigation to silence critics
Delays and dysfunction continue to mount in the county court, as revealed in a scathing Justice Committee report and under discussion this week by NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School. Bulk claims—especially from private parking firms—are overwhelming the system, with 8,000 cases filed weekly
Writing in NLJ this week, Thomas Rothwell and Kavish Shah of Falcon Chambers unpack the surprise inclusion of a ban on upwards-only rent reviews in the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill
Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve charts the turbulent progress of the Employment Rights Bill through the House of Lords, in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll