View source for R (F and Thompson) v SSHD (2010) UKSC 17

''The notification requirements in Part 2 of the [[Sexual Offences Act 2003]] (the Sex Offenders Register) constitute a disproportionate interference with [[Article 8]] rights because they make no provision for individual review of the requirements.''

==Related judgments==
[[R (F and Thompson) v SSHD (2010) UKSC 17]]
*[[R (TF and Thompson) v SSHD (2009) EWCA Civ 792]]
:*[[R (F and Thompson) v SSHD (2008) EWHC 3170 (QB)]]

==External link==
{{#bailii:[2010] UKSC 17}}

[http://www.supremecourt.gov.uk/docs/UKSC_2009_0144_ps_v2.pdf Press release on Supreme Court website]

[http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/parliamentary-business/oral-statements/sex-offender-statement/ Oral ministerial statement, 'Statement on sex offenders' register' (16/2/11)] - In response to the Supreme Court decision, the police will be given the power to remove a sex offender from the register; there will be no right of appeal.

[[Category:Brief summary]]
[[Category:Transcript]]
[[Category:2010 cases]]
[[Category:Other criminal law cases]]