Judicial Review - to be heard some time

Well, the High Court has now decided, in its wisdom, that there are grounds for hearing the judicial review. There is no timescale for the hearing at this stage, but something will happen at some time....

This is what they said:

In the High Court of Justice Queen’s Bench Division Administrative Court

co Ref: 00/3570/2015

in the matter of an application for Judicial Review

The Queen on the application of DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS 

 versus

STRATFORD MAGISTRATES COURT

Interested Parties: (1) ANGELA DITCHFIELD (2) ISA ABDULLA (3) THOMAS FRANKLIN (4) LAURA BUTLER (5) SUSANNA MENGESHA (6) BRAM VRANKEN (7) LUIS TORREJON (8) JAVIER NEIDHART

NOTIFICATION of the Judge's decision (CPR Part 54.11, 54.12)

Following consideration of the documents lodged by the Claimant and the Acknowledgement(s) of Service filed by the Defendant and interested Parties

Order by The Honourable Mrs Justice Jefford 

Permission is hereby granted 

Observations:

1. The interested Parties were charged with offences of wilfuily obstructing the highway contrary to s. 137 of the Highways Act 1980 in trying to obstruct vehicles headed to the Defence Security Exhibition. Their defence was that they were using reasonable force to prevent illegal arms sales and/or crimes committed overseas.

2. Having regard to the authorities relied on in the Claimant's application tor permission, in particular, R v Jones. Birch v DPP and Barkshire. it is reasonably arguable that the learned District Judge was wrong in law in finding that a defence under 5.3(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1967 was available to the Interested Parties in the circumstances of this case and in acquitting them. The issue is also one of general public importance.

3. Further or alternatively, it is reasonably arguable that the learned District Judge was wrong in law in refusing to state a case on the grounds that the Claimant grounds of appeal were frivolous.