header-logo header-logo

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

Police

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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Should a conviction stand when a later ruling reveals that the law underpinning it was wrong? The answer exposes a clash between finality and justice
The Environment Agency can prosecute offences beyond environmental legislation where proceedings support its statutory functions, the Divisional Court has confirmed
back-to-top-scroll