The transcripts of the official inquiry into the culture, practices and ethics of the press. More…

The only other document which might be relevant to the advice you gave in August 2006 is document 64, tab 64, in what I'm calling the DPP bundle, which is page 18654, an email from Mr Mably. If you look at paragraph 3, this is Mr Mably's recollection in October 2009. He says:

"There was no written legal opinion. Our advice on the ambit of section 1 was given to the CPS orally in conference. It may be helpful to point out that our advice was based on section 1(1) of RIPA, which requires the communication to be intercepted 'in the course of its transmission'; section 2(7), an interpretative provision, which gives an extended meaning to the times while a communication is to be taken as being in transmission; and the observation of Lord Woolf CJ ... in relation to the effect of section 2(7): 'Subsection (7) has the effect of extending the time of communication until the intended recipient has collected it'. Our view was that the observations of Lord Woolf were correct, and accorded with the rationale of the prohibition in section 1(1). Moreover, it was also our view that in this case there was nothing to be gained from seeking to contend for a wider interpretation of section 2(7) than that contemplated by Lord Woolf."

Might that be right?

Keyboard shortcuts

j previous speech k next speech