24/7
HELPLINE
󰀑 020 7837 3456
Home Public Order: Breach of the Peace

In the case of R v Howell,[1] the Court defined the offence of breach of the peace as an act done or threatened to be done which either actually harms a person, or in his presence, his property, or is likely to cause such harm being done. Breach of the peace can also be committed where a person is put in fear of being harmed through an assault, an affray, a riot, an unlawful assembly, or some other form of disturbance. Contrary to popular consensus, breach of peace does not have to be committed in the public, it may also occur in private.

One of the major problems prosecutors have when bringing a breach of the peace charge against people is the fact that very careful consideration must be given to their human rights such as freedom of expression freedom of association and association. Although most cases of breach of peace can be resolved by the police without the necessary exercise of their arrest powers, there are instances where the breach is of such a serious nature that it becomes mandatory to arrest the offender on the spot. The Police’s powers of arrest also extend to private properties where they have reason to believe that breach of the peace is about to or being committed. This is known as the powers of entry.

Criminal Defence Solicitors in UK

If you have been accused by the police of member of the public of breaching the peace, you need to give conduct of your case to a carry competent network of Criminal Defence lawyers. London’s most prominent criminal defence law networks boast of criminal defence lawyers who are absolute geniuses at what they do. They will provide you with exemplary advice first and foremost and go through the full details of the matter for the establishment of our best line of defence in your case. There are a number of defences that can be relied upon in court where a client is facing charges of breach of the peace. The most important factor however is the ability to be able to evidence to the court that the offender did not have any guilty mind or actus reus at the time the offence was allegedly committed.


[1] (1982) QB 416

 

󰁕 Featured on 󰁒