Is it not even worse than that, because, in order to get compensation, someone would have to establish that the person who had seized the goods did not have a reasonable suspicion that an offence was being committed? Case law shows that the test of reasonable suspicion is less than that required to establish a prima facie case.
Canterbury City Council Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Christopher Chope
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Thursday, 14 January 2010.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Canterbury City Council Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
503 c927 Session
2009-10Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-11 10:04:54 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_609455
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_609455
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_609455