Ex parte AJD Holdings Ltd and others R v The Central Criminal Court and the British Railways Board
Legislation
Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1994, s. 15(6)
Keywords
search warrant; business documents
Counsel
Peter John Andrews QC, Mr Anthony Ronald Webb
Solicitors
Messrs Rowe and Maw; The Solicitor BR Railways Board.
Judge
Nolan LJ and Jowitt J
Court
Queen's Bench Division
Reported
[1992] Crim.L.R 668
Summary
A search warrant was applied for in the context of alleged systematic fraudulent activity.
A warrant was granted and documents seized but it had failed to comply with s.15(6) (b) PACE 1984 because there was a discrepancy between the information sworn by the police officer, which was restricted to business documents, and the warrant which failed to include this qualification. The warrant purported to give the warrant holder a free hand to seek and seize all documents and was therefore invalid.
The phrase 'so far as practicable' is imprecise but the articles sought could in this case have been described more accurately than letters, notes etc.
Decision
Jowitt J. suggested the following matters to consider when applying for and executing search warrants:
- Material should be described to be clear to anyone considering lawfulness and readily understood by officers conducting searches.
- The link between the material and the crime should be made clear.
- It might sometimes be appropriate to seek discovery of documents described as 'appearing to relate' to the particular matters for which the power of search is sought.
- It is desirable to make a written note of anything said in support of the application.
- Careful briefing of the officers.
- The officer in charge should ensure his team are aware of the limits.