R v Sarti and others (Appellants)

Case summary

Case ID

UKSC/2025/0080

Parties

Appellant(s)

Chiara Sarti, Daniel Hall, Phoebe Plummer

Respondent(s)

Crown Prosecution Service

Issue

(1) Are the ingredients of the offence contrary to section 7 of the Public Order Act 2023 (“POA 2023”) sufficient to ensure any conviction for that offence will be compatible with Articles 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights (“ECHR”)? (2) If a separate proportionality assessment is required, should such a decision be made by the judge or by the jury?

Facts

The Appellants were part of a “slow march” on the Earl’s Court Road on 15 November 2023. The Appellants and 61 others had gathered outside Earl’s Court tube station and proceeded to walk slowly down the road towards the junction with Cathcart Road. Both Earl’s Court Road and Cathcart Road are designated as A roads. The protestors had gathered under the banner of “JUST STOP OIL”. The police, who had attended shortly after being notified at 10:38, warned protestors to leave the road. The Appellants and others did not leave the road. The Appellants were arrested and charged on indictment with an offence contrary to section 7 of the POA 2023. On 15 May 2024, after a trial lasting six days in the Crown Court at Southwark, the Appellants were convicted before HHJ Hehir and a jury of interfering with key national infrastructure contrary to section 7. On 6 February 2025, the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) dismissed the Appellants’ appeals. The Court of Appeal certified that a point of law of general public importance was involved in the decision to dismiss the appeals. However, the Court of Appeal refused permission to appeal. The Appellants now appeal directly to the UK Supreme Court.

Date of issue

8 May 2025

Case origin

PTA

Back to top