Hawkes, R (on the application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions

An arrest for breach of the peace requires evidence of actual or threatened violence. Abusive language and an aggressive demeanour may contribute to an imminent threat of violence, but they do not establish an actual breach without a sufficient violent content or connection. An arrest for obstruction is unavailable unless the circumstances also involve an actual or apprehended breach of the peace. Where a submission of no case depends on the particular facts and the way the trial has been conducted, magistrates are not generally required to give reasons for rejecting it at the close of the prosecution case.

The claimant was convicted of assaulting a police officer in the execution of his duty and obstructing a police officer. The convictions arose after she entered a police vehicle containing her arrested son, refused to leave, was arrested for breach of the peace, and later bit an officer who took hold of her arms.

On a case stated, the central issue was whether the arrest for breach of the peace was lawful. The Administrative Court also considered whether the magistrates were entitled to reject a submission of no case without giving reasons, and whether the obstruction conviction could stand.

1. The appeal against the assault conviction was allowed. The arrest for breach of the peace was unlawful, so the officer was not acting in the execution of his duty when the assault occurred. The conviction for assault was quashed.
2. Following R v Howell [1982] 1 QB 416, an actual or threatened breach of the peace requires a connection with violence. The claimant’s abusive language, aggressive demeanour, refusal to leave the vehicle and obstructive conduct could have supported a case that violence was imminently threatened. On the facts stated, however, there were no verbal or other threats and no conduct with a sufficiently violent content or connection to establish that a breach had already occurred.
3. The fact that the claimant had obstructed the police did not itself provide a power of arrest. Obstruction was not an arrestable offence in these circumstances. An arrest for obstruction required circumstances involving an actual or apprehended breach of the peace.
4. The magistrates were not required to give reasons for rejecting the submission of no case to answer. Applying the approach in Moran v DPP [2002] EWHC 89 Admin, the issue depended on the particular facts and on the way the advocates had presented the case. There was no unfairness or prejudice to the claimant.
5. The surviving obstruction conviction was not challenged. The costs order was therefore left undisturbed, while the fine and compensation order relating to the quashed assault conviction were quashed.

High Court (Administrative Court) — On a case stated by the magistrates, the court answered that the arrest for breach of the peace was unlawful, quashed the assault conviction and related financial orders, and left the obstruction conviction and costs order undisturbed.