Court of Appeal overturns restraining order in sexual offences case

Court of Appeal overturns restraining order in sexual offences case

The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division, has overturned a restraining order imposed on a father, referred to as 'D', following his conviction for attempted sexual assault against his older daughter, 'C1', and acquittal on charges involving his younger daughter, 'C2'. The judgment was delivered by Lord Justice Lewis, Mrs Justice Yip DBE, and Mr Justice Foxton.

In February 2024, D was convicted in the Crown Court at Kingston upon Thames of attempting to sexually assault C1 and was sentenced to three years' imprisonment. A restraining order was also imposed, prohibiting contact with C1 for ten years. D was acquitted of two charges of sexual assault against C2, yet a restraining order was still imposed, which he appealed.

The appeal focused on whether the restraining order against C2 was justified under section 5A of the Protection from Harassment Act 1977. This section allows for a restraining order post-acquittal if necessary to protect someone from harassment. The Crown Court judge had found that D's behaviour caused C2 distress, partly due to his actions towards C1 and his alleged inappropriate conduct towards C2.

Ms Lisa Wilson, representing D, argued that the judge did not sufficiently explain the conduct that warranted the restraining order, especially given the lack of evidence of inappropriate behaviour since 2016. She highlighted the pre-sentence report's assessment of a low risk of reoffending and contested the judge's assertion that D had been on bail for most of the intervening period.

The Court of Appeal found no evidence of a future risk of harassment towards C2. The distress C2 experienced was primarily linked to the abuse of C1, and the court did not find this sufficient to justify a restraining order. The court also noted that C2, now an adult, had not lived with her parents for some time, reducing the likelihood of future distress.

The court concluded that the evidence did not support the necessity of a restraining order to protect C2 from future harassment. It set aside the restraining order, emphasising the need for a clear basis for such orders, especially when the individual has been acquitted of the charges.

This case underscores the careful consideration required when imposing restraining orders post-acquittal, balancing the need for protection with the rights of the acquitted individual.

Learn More

For more information on legal protections and harassment, see BeCivil's guide to UK Employment Law.