Fletcher & Anor v Director Of Public Prosecutions & Anor

The Court of Appeal treated the proposed challenge as raising a point of law of general public importance for consideration by the House of Lords. It granted a certificate on whether a banning order under section 14A of the Football Spectators Act 1989, as amended by the Football (Disorder) Act 2000, amounted to a penalty within Article 7(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights. Leave was refused, subject to agreement by the other judge, and any necessary extension of time was granted. The substantive Article 7 issue was not decided.

Robert Fletcher and Mark Lilley appealed from the Divisional Court of the Queen’s Bench Division. The appeal concerned a football banning order made under section 14A of the Football Spectators Act 1989, as amended by the Football (Disorder) Act 2000. The Court of Appeal was asked to certify a point of law of general public importance and to deal with leave and timing. The proposed certified question was whether the order was a penalty within Article 7(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The judgment dealt with certification and associated procedural matters, not with the substantive human rights issue.

1. Lord Justice Laws stated that he would grant the certificate in the terms sought. The certified question concerned whether a banning order made pursuant to section 14A of the Football Spectators Act 1989, as amended by the Football (Disorder) Act 2000, amounted to a penalty within the meaning of the second sentence of Article 7(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights.
2. Lord Justice Laws proceeded on the basis that Mr Justice Poole would agree to the certificate and to refusing leave. He would communicate with Poole J, after which the orders would stand as made.
3. The court also addressed the application for an extension of time. Because time had passed owing to the appellants’ earlier attempt to bring the matter before the Civil Division, Lord Justice Laws granted any extension that was necessary.

The court therefore certified the question, refused leave subject to the stated agreement, and left the Article 7 issue for determination by the further appellate court.

1. Court of Appeal (Civil Division): In [2001] EWCA Civ 1874, Lord Justice Laws granted the certificate in principle, refused leave subject to Poole J’s agreement, and granted any necessary extension of time.
2. High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench Division, Divisional Court: The matter came before the Court of Appeal on appeal from this court. Its decision and citation are not stated.