Information Rights Team
Newham Dockside
1000 Dockside Road
London
E16 2QU
Email:
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxx.xxx.xx
FOI Reference: 27242193
Date: 13th November 2023
Freedom of Information Act 2000
Subject: Newham City Farm
We write with regard to your recent enquiry for information held by the Council under the
provisions of the Freedom of Information Act 2000
Request and Response
1) What legal action was taken by LBN against former employees of LBN who worked at the
farm?
-
The London Borough of Newham sought to prosecute two LB Newham
employees for various offences as detailed in the attached information.
2) What was the result of this legal action, and what were the Judge's comments?
-
The trial began on 27th March 2023 and ended on 30th March 2023 at the
Magistrates Court. The court found that there was an abuse of process for LB
Newham to prosecute the defendants.
-
The ruling which was made by the learned District Judge McIvor meant that the
proceedings had been stayed. DJ McIvor formed the view that it was unfair to
try the defendants in a criminal trial.
-
When proceedings are stayed, there has not been an adjudication of the merits
of the case (i.e. on the guilty or innocence of an accused) and the action of the
court has thus prevent the case from moving forward, and in doing so it brings
the case to an end.
-
However, because of the presumption of innocence i.e. a person is innocent
until proven guilty, both of the defendants are entitled to be regarded as
innocent of the charges that they faced regardless of the fact that there has
been no adjudication on the merits.
-
District Judge McIvor did not provide written reasons for her judgement. There
is no obligation for her to do so.
-
On 4th May 2023, LB Newham did request that court provide a copy of the notes
taken by the court during the trial by the District Judge and the Court Clerk
however received no response from the court. For the avoidance of doubt, the
Magistrates Court is not a court of record therefore the court is not obliged that
the proceedings are recorded and available as evidence of fact.
3) Which elected Members (Mayor and/or Councillor) were consulted regarding this legal
action?
-
No elected members were consulted as to the decision whether to prosecute
the defendants.
-
The investigation into the farm and the two defendants was carried out by the
Animal Welfare Team and decision as to whether the case meets the
prosecution test was made by the council’s in house legal team.
-
The council’s in house legal team is independent of the Animal Welfare Team.
The decision to prosecute is based on the application of the Code for Crown
Prosecutors which is applied by the reviewing lawyer and ratified by ta senior
lawyer within the legal department.
4) Please provide a copy of all internal supporting documents, briefings, etc, including the
comments of, and if appropriate, record of consent by the above Elected Members to legal
action
-
As stated in response to question 3, no elected members were consulted as to
the decision whether to prosecute the defendants therefore there are no
internal documents to disclose in this regard.
Please quote the FOI reference number above in any future communications.
If you are dissatisfied with the handling of your request, you have the right to ask for an
internal review. Internal review requests should be submitted within two months of the date
of receipt of the response to your original letter and should be submitted to the contact
details given above.
If you are stil dissatisfied with the Council’s response after the internal review you have a
right of appeal to the Information Commissioner at:
www.ico.org.uk
If you require any further information please do not hesitate to contact a member of our team
at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxx.xxx.xx
Yours sincerely
Information Rights Team
Newham Council
