R v Hancox and another [2010] EWCA Crim 102; [2010] WLR (D) 30
“The interference that the imposition of a serious crime prevention order would make to a defendant’s freedom of action had to be justified by the public benefit in preventing, restricting or disrupting involvement by the defendant in serious crime; it was not enough that the order might have some benefit.”
WLR Daily, 10th February 2010
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
