Hayes v Willoughby [2013] UKSC 17, [2013] All ER (D) 190 (Mar)
Supreme Court, Lord Neuberger P, Lord Mance, Lord Wilson, Lord Sumption and Lord Reed SCJJ, 20 March 2013
To establish the defence of having been engaged in a course of conduct pursued for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime, pursuant to s 1(3)(a) of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 (PHA 1997), the test is that of rationality on the part of the alleged harasser.
Robin Allen QC and Akua Reindorf (instructed by Ginn & Co) for the claimant. Clive Wolman for the defendant.
In late 2003, the defendant embarked on a personal vendetta against the claimant. He alleged that the claimant’s management of certain companies had been characterised by fraud, embezzlement and tax evasion, and sent much correspondence to public authorities including the police. The claimant issued proceedings seeking damages for harassment and for an injunction to restrain its continuance. The judge found that the defendant’s words and acts had constituted harassment under s 7(2) of the Protection from Harassment Act
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=77dbbdb7_1)
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=b3bea7f_1)
