header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
11 October 2007 / Neil Parpworth
Issue: 7292 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

Unseen outrage

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Should the offence of outraging public decency be abolished? Neil Parpworth reports

In its report Conspiracy and Criminal Law Reform (1976), Law Com No 76, the Law Commission recommended that the common law offence of outraging public decency be abolished. Although this view was expressed more than 30 years ago, the offence remains and outraging public decency has continued to attract criticism in the years that have followed.
In a comment on R (Rose) v DPP [2006] EWHC 852 (Admin), [2006] All ER (D) 225 (Mar), Professor Ormerod opined that the offence “remains as unsatisfactorily defined as most of the other common law offences” (see [2006] Crim LR 993). Criticisms have also been levelled at the way in which the offence may be used by prosecutors to preclude the availability of statutory defences.

With these criticisms in mind, the latest in a long line of cases, R v Hamilton [2007] EWCA Crim 2026, [2007] All ER (D) 99 (Aug), merits consideration to determine what light it throws, if any, on the elements of the offence of outraging

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
NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Firm welcomes partner with specialist expertise in family and art law

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Dual-qualified partner joins international private client team

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Driving test fraudsters steer towards jail
Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
NLJ this week: Deepfakes demand data law muscle
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
NLJ this week: 40% penalty for coercive control
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
NLJ this week: Mbappé row spotlights ‘ethics bonuses’
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law
NLJ this week: Appeal court reins in ‘wrong defendant’ switcheroo

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll