Page 30 - tmp

in the case of a foreign national, consideration should be given to the need for the order to be
translated.
The report of the working group also provides examples of general prohibitions imposed by
the courts which in their view were specific and enforceable and could be incorporated in
ASBOs in order to protect persons from a wide range of anti-social behaviour. These include
conditions prohibiting the offender from.
PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL
66,
Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf
Page: 703
R. v DEAN BONES AND OTHERS
living anywhere other than a specified address without the permission of a nominated person.
entering an area edged in red on the attached map including both footways of any road which
forms the boundary area.
visiting a named individual unless accompanied by a parent or legal guardian.
associating with a named individual in a public place.
leaving his home between certain hours except in the case of emergency etc.
An order made under s. 1C lakes effect on the day on which it was made, but the court may
provide in any such order that such requirements of the order as it may specify shall, during
any period when the offender is detained in legal custody, be suspended until his release from
that custody (S.1C(5)). In the Court observed that where custodial sentences in excess of a
few months were passed and offenders were liable to be released on licence (and therefore
subject to recall) the circumstances in which there would be a demonstrable necessity to
make a suspended anti-social behaviour order, to take effect on release, would be limited,
although there would be cases in which geographical restraints could properly supplement
licence conditions.
Anthony Malcolm Vittles ]2004] EWCA Crim 1089 [20051 1 Cr. App. R.(S.) 8 is an
example of a case in which the Court of Appeal decided that there was a demonstrable
necessity to make a “suspended” ASBO, despite the fact that the appellant was sentenced to a
total of three years and 10 months' imprisonment, The appellant, who was a heavy drug user,
admitted breaking into between 10 and 30 vehicles belonging to American servicemen who
lived off airbases used by American forces. The offences involved theft of items from the
motor cars to a value of £3,500. In upholding the making of the order, although reducing the
term, the Court of Appeal referred to and said that they took the view that the transient,
vulnerable, nature of the American population, specifically targeted by the appellant, made it
appropriate that, exceptionally, an antisocial behaviour order should be made,
notwithstanding the imposition of a substantial prison sentence.
An order shall have effect for a period (not less than two years) specified in the order or until
further order (S, l C (9) and 1C (7)). In Lonergan v Lewes Crown Court |20()5] EWHC 457;
[2005] 1 W.L.R. 2570; [2005] A.C.D. 84 (Admin) Maurice Kay L.J. said in the course of
delivering the judgment that just because an ASBO must run for a minimum of two years, it
does not follow that each and every prohibition within a particular order must endure for the
life of the order. Although doubt was expressed about this in the report of the working group
set up by Thomas L.J., in our view Maurice Kay L.J. is right. It may be necessary to include a
prohibition which would need to be amended or removed after a period of Lime for example
when the offender starts work (provided that at least one prohibition is ordered to have effect
for at least two years). Maurice Kay L.J. also said (para. [7)] that the statute requires the order
to be “substantially and not just formally prohibitory.”
PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL
.67,

Page 28 of 139