Director of Public Prosecutions v Hall

The power to vary a restraining order under section 5(4) of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 includes power to extend the order’s duration. The expiry date is a term of the order, whether the order is for a specified period or continues until further order. Variation requires a good reason based on changed circumstances. The court must construe the provision so that the protective purpose of the order can be achieved simply and expeditiously.

This was an appeal by way of case stated from the Peterlee Youth Magistrates’ Court. A restraining order had been made against the defendant for 12 months under section 5 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. He breached it twice before its expiry. The prosecutor applied under section 5(4) to extend the expiry date, but the magistrates held that they had no power to do so. The issue was whether a finite restraining order could be extended by variation before it expired.

1. The appeal was allowed. The case was remitted to the magistrates with a direction to consider the prosecutor’s application to extend the restraining order.
2. Section 5(4) empowers the court to vary or discharge a restraining order. It contains no restriction preventing the court from extending the period of an order made for a specified term. The contrast with section 11(6), which expressly prevents an increase in the period of a Scottish order, supported that construction.
3. The duration of a restraining order is a term of the order, just as much as a geographical or other restriction. It may therefore be varied as to its expiry date.
4. The court referred to Shaw v the Director of Public Prosecutions [2005] EWHC 1215 (Admin), where variation under section 5(4) was said to require a good reason arising from changed circumstances. The same consideration applies to an application to extend duration.
5. The protective purpose of section 5 required a construction enabling the court to protect the victim or potential victim from further harassment in the most simple and expeditious way. On the facts, two breaches before expiry plainly justified consideration of an extension.

Mrs Justice Rafferty agreed with Lord Justice Scott Baker.

• High Court (Administrative Court): allowed the appeal by way of case stated and remitted the matter to the Peterlee Youth Magistrates’ Court.
• Peterlee Youth Magistrates’ Court: held that a restraining order made for a specified period could not be extended under section 5(4) of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.