Affray meaning

Morgan v Times Newspaper Ltd [2019] EWHC 1525 (QB) What are the practical implications of this case? This decision addresses the test for assessing whether remarks about professional competence are defamatory. The defendant maintained that defamation of a person’s professional (or business) reputation requires an imputation of an habitual or entrenched trait, not a single episode of negligence or ineptitude. The court emphatically rejected that contention, explaining that one instance of incompetent professional work can harm reputation as much as a charge against overall competence—illustrated by a barrister whose performance in one case could be decisive. The judgment also offers a useful synthesis of the authorities in this area, including discussion and application of Skuse v Granada Television Ltd [1996] EMLR 278, together with consideration of various commentary on the topic. What was the background? This libel claim arose from an article published by the defendant newspaper headed ‘Senior Prosecutor under fire after Stokes is cleared of affray’. The ‘Senior Prosecutor’ referred to is the...

Affray is an offence created by section 3 of the Public Order Act 1986 (POA 1986). It can be prosecuted in either the magistrates’ court or the Crown Court. The magistrates’ court may decline jurisdiction, for instance where a weapon is involved, objects are thrown, or the behaviour results in serious injury. Elements of the offence of affray The prosecution must establish that: a person acts intentionally uses unlawful violence towards another, or threatens it; or recognises that their conduct could be violent or threatening towards another; and a person of reasonable firmness present would fear for their own safety Where two or more individuals use or threaten unlawful violence, their conduct is assessed collectively to determine whether the offence is made out. In Dragjoshi v Croydon Magistrates’ Court, the Appellant appealed by way of case stated, disputing whether the court could convict without reliable identification evidence, particularly where some individuals were accepted as attempting to prevent violence...

Driving disqualification for any offence When an individual is convicted of any offence in the Crown Court or a magistrates’ court, the court may, either as an alternative to other disposals or in addition to them, bar the person from holding or obtaining a driving licence. It has been determined that exercising this power is appropriate for an offence of affray stemming from a road‑rage incident (R v Bye and R v Ade Tute Sofejum). Disqualification following conviction of any offence functions both as an additional penalty and a preventive tool available to the court. The court cannot set a period of disqualification on an arbitrary basis...