R (on the application of AR) (Appellant) v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police and another (Respondents)

The appellant, AR, sought judicial review of an Enhanced Criminal Record Certificate (ECRC) issued to him under section 113B of the Police Act 1997. The ECRC contained details of a criminal charge for which he had been tried and acquitted. The Court of Appeal dismissed AR’s claim that the disclosure was a breach of his rights under either article 6.2 (presumption of innocence) or article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention on Human Rights. AR appealed to the Supreme Court on the article 8 issue. The appeal was dismissed. The Supreme Court held that the ECRC had been properly issued and disclosed information which was relevant and proportionate to the need to protect children and vulnerable adults. The disclosure did not involve any breach of AR’s rights under article 8 of the Convention. The court considered the proper role of appellate courts in reviewing decisions of lower courts on the issue of proportionality under the Convention. It held that appellate courts should not make their own assessment of proportionality unless the lower court had made a material error or flaw in its reasoning. The Supreme Court also considered the conceptual and practical issues arising from the relationship of the ECRC procedure to criminal proceedings. It expressed concern at the lack of information about how an ECRC is likely to be treated by a potential employer in cases where it discloses allegations which have been tested in court and have led to acquittal.