header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
21 May 2021 / Neil Parpworth
Issue: 7933 / Categories: Features , Criminal , Public
printer mail-detail

Public Order Act: crossing the (thin blue) line? (Pt 2)

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
49414
One-person protests & failing to comply with conditions. Neil Parpworth continues his exploration of the proposed changes to the provisions in the Public Order Act 1986
  • Offences: knowingly failing to comply with conditions, properly communicated by police.
  • One-person protests: new statutory powers.

In the first part of this article, the focus of attention was on Pt 3 of the Police, Crime Sentencing and Courts Bill (PCSC Bill), in particular those provisions which seek to extend the statutory powers of the police under Part II of the Public Order Act 1986 in relation to a ‘public procession’ or a ‘public assembly’ (see ‘Crossing the (thin blue) line?’, NLJ 14 May 2021, p13). In the discussion which follows, two further impacts of Pt 3 of the Bill will be considered: how it proposes to alter the offences relating to the breach of a condition attached to either a procession or an assembly, and increase the penalties for their commission; and its conferral

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

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll