High Court Overturns Conviction for using ART Card

[bigtee]

From here: _http://www.thepublican.com/story.asp?sectioncode=7&storycode=69275&c=1

Licensee's foreign satellite conviction quashed by High Court

Only part of report copied and pasted for copyright reasons.

A licensee has had a conviction for screening foreign satellite football overturned by the High Court in London.

Gregory Turner, of the Golden Cup, Yoxall, Burton-upon-Trent, was originally convicted and fined £500 in June 2009 for showing games using an Arab Radio and Television (ART) Network system, after the case was brought by Media Protection Services (MPS).

He appealed the decision at Stafford Crown Court last March, but this was rejected.

However, judges at the High Court earlier this month allowed the appeal and quashed the conviction, on the basis the court had not considered EU law.

The long-running issue of foreign satellite football is currently being considered by judges at the European Court of Justice.

Martin Howe QC, acting for Turner, previously argued the case had an EU dimension as ART conducted “economic activity” in Italy.

Now, this is a very interesting decision because of its effect on the hitherto widely held view that the ongoing proceedings in the European Court have no bearing on the use of satellite cards from outside the EU.

 

[bigtee]

Useful commentary on the case here: _http://www.informationoverlord.co.uk/?p=453

The Crown Court considered that there were two issues, one of dishonesty and one of EU law. Interestingly the Court chose to essentially ignore the EU law aspect stating, and given the pending references to the EU in the cases mentioned above: “We do not feel, however … that it would be appropriate for this tribunal to consider or to decide the difficult and conflicting issues of community law which arise in the background to this appeal … We think that the broader and complex issues of the application of EU law are for a different tribunal on a different day…”

The appeal was therefore dealt with only on the point of whether or not there was dishonesty on the publican’s part, totally ignoring the EU aspect with the Court saying it was bound by the first ruling in the Murphy v MPS case, and so it should base its decision on domestic law.

The High Court disagreed, finding the Crown Court’s ruling was a plain misunderstanding of the first ruling in the Murphy v MPS case, which whilst it did deal with domestic law did not give a green light to decide issues under section 297 without considering EU law aspects. According to the Court “It is fundamental that a court, along with other courts who have considered similar points, should include a consideration of the EU law dimension.”

The Court however refused to hear arguments about whether this is a case in which EU law applies at all, considering the Satellite licence was with a Middle East operator. But the court decided that actually whether the case in one that involves EU law is itself a decision which requires consideration of EU law.

In light of the bolded it has just become more difficult to prosecute users of ART cards and other non-EU-provider cards* if it is arguable that the non-EU-Provider pursues economic activity within the EU. At the least, it seems that magistrates now will be very much less willing to decide these cases since they are ill equipped to deal with the issues of European law that will now inevitably arise in those cases.

*EDIT Unless and until the ECJ goes against the Advocate-General's recommendations in the Karen Murphy case.

 

[rolfw]

Interesting one, thanks for the info.

 

[pajo100]

Any news on the Karen (good on ya) Murphy case as thought it would be decided by now.

 

[rolfw]

Not yet, but surely can't be too long.