Blog
Rayner my parade! The importance of specialist advice.
Jemma Brimblecombe
On 1 December 2015 campaigner Aisling Hubert made an application for judicial review over the Director of Public Prosecution’s (DPP’s) decision not to prosecute two doctors who were filmed offering to carry out abortions based on the children’s gender.
In May 2014, the Dangerous Dogs Act was amended so that dog owners can face prosecution if their dog attacks a person on private property.
Following this change in the law and the Royal Mail’s crackdown on dog attacks on postal workers, last month a dog owner from Manchester became one of the first people in Britain to be prosecuted by the Royal Mail. The attack, which left a postal worker with a six-inch wound, had initially been reported to the police but the owner only received a caution. Unsatisfied with this, the Royal Mail decided to launch its own private prosecution. The owner pleaded guilty to owning a dog which was dangerously out of control and was placed on a seven-week curfew, ordered to pay costs and compensation and was banned from keeping dogs for 18 months.
Over the last five years City of London Police have had their budget reduced by 15% arguably leading to a reduction in the number of white collar crime investigations. As with the reduction in raids by the SFO this year, the stretch on resources for those responsible for investigating white collar offences is increasing while wrongdoing by corporates and individuals is ever present.
Private prosecutions offer an excellent legal remedy to those who do not have the support of the state prosecuting agencies to commence a prosecution. But if you fancy yourself as a would-be private prosecutor, be warned, there are significant risks associated with starting a prosecution which are motivated purely out of self-interest and as a means to blackmail or punish another.
On 1 September 2015, as a result of a private prosecution which we brought on behalf of the Security Industry Authority (SIA) in partnership with the London Regional Asset Recovery Team (RART), two security company directors were ordered to pay a total of £666,697 under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA).
Jemma Brimblecombe
Charles Richardson
Oliver Oldman
Legal Notices | Privacy Notice | Fraud Warning | Modern Slavery Statement | Complaints | Website Terms | Cookie Policy | Accessibility | Site Map
© 2025 Kingsley Napley LLP. All rights reserved. Authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority, registration number 500046.
Skip to content Home About Us Insights Services Contact Accessibility