Criminal disclosures: Supreme Court declares multiple conviction rule incompatible with Article 8 ECHR
In Re an application by Lorraine Gallagher for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland) R (on the application of P, G and W) (respondents) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and another (appellants)
[2019] UKSC 3
Criminal disclosures: Supreme Court declares multiple conviction rule incompatible with Article 8 ECHR
In a 4-1 majority decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the multiple conviction rule – whereby the existence of more than one conviction will mean that all convictions, no matter their age or subject matter will be disclosable – is incompatible with Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 ("ECHR").
Facts
The respondents to the appeals (Gallagher, P, G and W) were convicted or received cautions or reprimands in respect of relatively minor offending:
- Gallagher: In 1996, Mrs Gallagher was convicted and fined £10 for one count of driving without wearing a seatbelt and £25 each for four counts of carrying a child under fourteen without a seatbelt. In 1998, she was again convicted and fined £40 each for two counts of the latter. She has no other convictions. In 2013 she applied for a position at a day centre for adults with learning difficulties which required an Enhanced Criminal Disclosure.
- P: In 1999, P, while homeless and suffering from undiagnosed schizophrenia, received a caution for the theft of a sandwich and, in the same year, convicted of the theft of a book worth 99p and failing to surrender to the bail granted to her after her arrest for that offence. Now qualified to work as a teaching assistant, P has not been able to find employment as a result of her disclosure obligation.
- G: In 2006, aged 13, G was arrested for engaging in sexual activity with two younger boys. The police record indicates that the sexual activity was consensual and "seems to have been in the form of 'dares' … and is believed to have been a case of sexual curiosity and experimentation on the part of all three boys." G was given a reprimand in September 2006. In 2011, when working as a library assistant in a local college, G was required to apply for an Enhanced Criminal Disclosure as his work involved contact with children. The police proposed to…
