On the 20 January 2017, Brian Green appeared at his local Magistrates’ Court in connection with an allegation of assaulting his former partner Natalie with whom he has children.
Brian pleaded guilty and was sentenced to a Community Order. In addition, Brian had imposed upon him a restraining order for a period of 12 months. The restraining order including a term not to go to Natalie’s then home address.
Natalie subsequently moved and sought a variation of the terms of the restraining order to take into account her new home address at Islington Square.
On the 28 April 2017, Brian attended Court for the hearing of the application to vary the terms of the restraining order.
The Court agreed to vary the terms of the restraining order as requested and made an Order which stated that until the 19 January 2018, Brian was prohibited from
- Contacting Natalie directly or indirectly unless through an agreed party to arrange contact with children;
- Going to Islington Square.
Brian subsequently received notification that the restraining order purportedly prohibited him from;
- Contacting Natalie directly or indirectly unless through an agreed party to arrange contact with children;
- Going to Itlington Road and Itlington Square.
Inaccurate information in respect of the variation to the restraining order was also passed to the Metropolitan Police Service.
On the 16 May 2017, Brian sent an email to the Court in which he stated “I have received the variations of the restraining order and would like to point out an error on the order, in part (b) I am allowed to go to Islington Road but I’m prohibited from entering Islington Square as agreed in Court.”
On the 19 May 2017, Brian saw Natalie on Islington Road.
Brian was later contacted by an Officer of the Metropolitan Police and asked to come down to the Police Station. Brian duly attended whereupon he was arrested on suspicion of breaching the restraining order in connection with his presence on Islington Road.
Brian immediately asserted that his conditions prevented him going to Islington Square but not Islington Road.
Notwithstanding Brian’s protests, he was taken into custody and processed and then kept in custody overnight.
The following day, Brian was charged with breaching a restraining order contrary to Section 5(5) and (6) of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, accused of being “at Islington Road without reasonable excuse” and then bailed to attend Court and released.
Brian subsequently attended court and pleaded not guilty. The case proceeded to trial. On the morning of the trial, the CPS offered no evidence and the case was dismissed.
On Brian’s behalf, I brought a claim for breach of Article 5 of the Human Rights Act.
Brian’s rights had been breached when the Court Service inaccurately recorded that the variations to the Restraining Order made on 28 April 2017 included a term that Brian was prohibited from going to Islington Road and further when inaccurate information in respect of that variation to the Restraining Order was shared with the Police.
It was clear that the Court Service had failed to accurately record the terms of the varied Restraining Order and failed to accurately inform the Metropolitan Police Service of the terms of the varied Restraining Order.
Following negotiation, the Court Service agreed to pay Brian £3,000 in compensation together with his legal fees.
My client’s name has been changed.
