ClASSIFICATION OF PROCEEDINGSCrime and disorder - application for anti-social behaviour order - proceedings civil not criminalR v Manchester Crown Court, Ex parte McCann and others: DC (Lord Woolf CJ and Rafferty J):22 November 2000The chief constable sought anti-social behaviour orders against the applicants, three boys aged 16, 15 and 13, pursuant to s.1 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998.

The stipendiary magistrate made the orders which, among other things, prohibited the applicants from entering a particular area of Manchester.

The judge in the Crown Court, having held that proceedings seeking an order under s.1 were civil rather than criminal and were therefore not subject to the rules of evidence applicable to criminal prosecutions or to the protection of art.6 of the European Convention on Human Rights as scheduled to the Human Rights Act 1998, dismissed their appeals.

The applicants sought judicial review.Adrian Fulford QC and James Stark (instructed by Burton Copeland, Manchester) for the applicants.

Charles Garside QC and Peter Cadwallader (instructed by the solicitor, Greater Manchester Police) for the chief constable.Held, refusing the application, that whether proceedings were criminal rather than civil could be difficult to determine and there was no overriding test; that proceedings alleging breach of an order made under s.1, which would undoubtedly be criminal, were quite separate and distinct from proceedings to obtain the order; that the procedure for applying for an order by complaint was one usually used for civil proceedings; that the order did not punish the individual concerned and, at most, restricted his activities; that the object of the order was the protection of the public; that the administrative nature of the proceedings was inconsistent with criminal proceedings; that, looking at the situation as a whole, under domestic law the proceedings to obtain the order were properly characterised as civil not criminal proceedings; that under the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights the domestic classification of proceedings, although not conclusive, was relevant, as was the nature of the conduct, the proceedings and the severity of any possible penalty; and that, accordingly, both under domestic law and under the jurisprudence of the Court of Human Rights the proceedings were civil not criminal (WLR).