Understanding Warrants in England and Wales

History of Warrants

Magna Carta and Due Process

The requirement for lawful authority before the state may interfere with a person's liberty or property has deep roots in English law. Chapter 39 of Magna Carta (1215) established that no free man shall be seized, imprisoned, or stripped of his rights except by the lawful judgement of his peers or by the law of the land. This principle, refined over eight centuries, is the foundation upon which the modern warrant system rests: the state cannot act against a person without judicial authorisation.

In mediaeval England, warrants were instruments of the Crown. The monarch or the Privy Council could issue a "general warrant" directing officers to arrest unnamed persons or search unspecified premises. These warrants were notoriously broad and open to abuse, empowering officials to act on suspicion alone without meaningful judicial oversight.

The End of General Warrants

The legal challenge to general warrants came to a head in the 18th century. In Entick v Carrington (1765), Lord Camden held that a general warrant issued by the Secretary of State to search the home and seize the papers of John Entick was unlawful. The court ruled that no executive authority could authorise entry into a private dwelling without specific legal authority. The judgment remains a cornerstone of English public law and was influential in shaping the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Similarly, in Leach v Money (1765) and Wilkes v Wood (1763), the courts struck down general warrants used to suppress political dissent, establishing that warrants must name the person to be arrested and the premises to be searched. These decisions moved English law decisively towards the modern requirement of specificity: a warrant must describe its target with precision and be authorised by a judicial officer on the basis of sworn evidence.

From Royal Prerogative to Judicial Oversight

Over the following centuries, the power to issue warrants shifted from the executive to the judiciary. The Justices of the Peace Act 1361 had already given local magistrates authority to keep the peace, and by the 19th century the justice of the peace had become the primary warrant-issuing authority. The Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 consolidated this role, providing the statutory framework under which most warrants are issued today.

The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) introduced detailed procedural safeguards for search warrants, codifying the protections that centuries of case law had developed: the requirement for reasonable grounds, the obligation to specify premises and articles, and the restrictions on what may be seized. The Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 modernised enforcement warrants, replacing the ancient "distress" with the "warrant of control" and establishing a regulated framework for the seizure of goods.

The Modern Position

Today, the warrant system reflects a balance between the state's need to investigate crime, enforce judgments, and maintain order on one hand, and the individual's right to liberty, privacy, and the peaceful enjoyment of property on the other. Every warrant must be issued by a judicial authority on the basis of evidence, must specify its scope, and must be executed in accordance with statutory safeguards. The evolution from Magna Carta to PACE is, in essence, the story of constraining state power through law.

How Warrants Are Obtained

The Information and Application

Most warrants begin with an "information": a written statement, usually on oath, laid before a justice of the peace or a district judge (magistrates' courts). The information sets out the facts that justify the warrant and the legal power under which it is sought. For arrest warrants, the information is typically laid by a police officer or a prosecutor under section 1 of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980. For search warrants, the application is made under the relevant statutory provision, most commonly section 8 of PACE 1984.

Ex Parte Applications

Warrant applications are made ex parte: only the applicant (usually the police) is present before the magistrate. The person who will be the subject of the warrant has no opportunity to oppose it before it is issued. This one-sided procedure is necessary because alerting the target would often frustrate the purpose of the warrant. However, the ex parte nature of the application places a heightened duty on the applicant to make full and frank disclosure of all material facts, including any matters that might weigh against the grant of the warrant.

The duty of candour is absolute. In R (Rawlinson and Hunter Trustees) v Central Criminal Court [2012] EWHC 2254 (Admin), the Divisional Court emphasised that the applicant must disclose all material known to them that might influence the magistrate's decision, whether favourable or unfavourable. Failure to disclose material facts may render the warrant unlawful and any evidence obtained under it liable to exclusion.

The Magistrate's Role

The magistrate must be satisfied, on the basis of the information presented, that the statutory conditions for the warrant are met. This is not a rubber stamp: the magistrate must apply their own judgement and may refuse the application if the grounds are insufficient. In R v Southwark Crown Court, ex parte Bowles [1998] AC 641, the House of Lords held that the jurisdiction to issue a warrant is a judicial act requiring independent assessment.

For search warrants under PACE section 8, the magistrate must be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing: (a) an indictable offence has been committed; (b) there is material on the premises that is likely to be of substantial value to the investigation; (c) the material is likely to be relevant evidence; and (d) access conditions are met. The access conditions require the applicant to show that it is not practicable to communicate with the occupier, or that entry will be refused, or that the purpose of the search may be frustrated unless immediate entry is secured.

Written Applications and PACE Code B

PACE Code of Practice B sets out detailed requirements for search warrant applications. The application should normally be made in writing, using the prescribed form. It must identify the enactment under which the warrant is sought, the premises to be searched, the articles or persons sought, and the grounds for belief. Where the application is for a "specific premises warrant," it must identify each set of premises. Where it is for an "all premises warrant" (introduced by the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005), the applicant must justify why access to all premises occupied or controlled by the suspect is necessary.

Arrest Warrants

An arrest warrant is issued by a magistrates' court under section 1 of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980. It authorises the arrest of a named individual and their production before the court. A warrant may be issued where an information has been laid before a justice of the peace and the justice is satisfied that the person should be compelled to attend.

The information must allege that the person has committed or is suspected of committing an offence. The justice must be satisfied that the issue of a summons would not be sufficient to secure the person's attendance: for example, because the person's address is unknown, because the person has previously failed to answer a summons, or because there are grounds to believe they will abscond. The justice must also be satisfied that the offence is indictable, or is punishable with imprisonment, or that the person's address is not sufficiently established for a summons to be served.

With Bail and Without Bail

Arrest warrants may be issued "with bail" (the person is released after arrest on condition they attend court on a specified date) or "without bail" (the person is detained and brought before the court as soon as practicable). A warrant with bail is appropriate where the offence is less serious and there is no significant risk of absconding. A warrant without bail may be issued where the court considers that detention is necessary to ensure the person's attendance or to prevent further offending.

The police execute most arrest warrants, although they may also be executed by civilian enforcement officers in certain circumstances. Where the warrant is "backed for bail," the officer executing it must release the person on bail to appear at court on the date specified, unless there are grounds to withhold bail under the Bail Act 1976.

Duration and Circulation

An arrest warrant does not expire. It remains in force until executed or withdrawn by the court, and may be circulated nationally via the Police National Computer (PNC). Where the warrant is issued by a magistrates' court in one petty sessions area, it may be executed anywhere in England and Wales. Warrants may also be flagged at ports and borders under the "Warnings Index" system operated by the Home Office, enabling the arrest of persons attempting to leave or enter the jurisdiction.

A person who is aware that a warrant has been issued for their arrest may surrender voluntarily at any police station. Voluntary surrender is generally viewed favourably by the court and may be a factor in any subsequent bail decision.

Search Warrants

A search warrant authorises the police to enter and search specified premises. The most commonly used provision is section 8 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE), which allows a justice of the peace to issue a warrant where there are reasonable grounds for believing that an indictable offence has been committed and that material likely to be of substantial value to the investigation is on the premises.

Scope and Specificity

The warrant must specify the premises to be searched and, so far as practicable, the articles or persons sought. Officers executing the warrant must identify themselves and produce the warrant if asked. Searches must be conducted at a reasonable hour unless this would frustrate the purpose. Officers may only search to the extent reasonably required to find the articles specified in the warrant: they may not conduct a general rummage through all of the occupier's belongings.

Under section 16 of PACE, the search must be carried out at a reasonable hour unless the officer reasonably believes that to do so would frustrate the purpose. Entry must be made at a reasonable time, and the officer must, if the occupier is present, identify themselves, show the warrant, and supply a copy. If the occupier is not present, a copy must be left in a prominent place on the premises.

Specific Premises and All Premises Warrants

PACE distinguishes between "specific premises warrants" (naming each set of premises) and "all premises warrants" (covering all premises occupied or controlled by a specified person). An all premises warrant may only be issued if the court is satisfied that it is not reasonably practicable to specify all the premises at the time of application and that the warrant is necessary to achieve the purpose of the search. This provision, introduced by the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005, is typically used in complex fraud or organised crime investigations where the suspect controls multiple properties.

Other Statutory Powers

Other statutes also provide for search warrants, each with its own conditions and safeguards. Key examples include: the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (s.23), authorising search for controlled drugs; the Theft Act 1968 (s.26), authorising search for stolen goods; the Firearms Act 1968 (s.46), authorising search for firearms; and the Terrorism Act 2000 (Schedule 5), authorising search in connection with terrorist investigations. Each statute prescribes its own threshold: some require only reasonable suspicion, while others require reasonable grounds for belief.

The Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 (sections 50 to 66) provides additional powers of seizure where it is not reasonably practicable to determine on the premises whether material falls within the scope of the warrant. This allows officers to remove material for examination elsewhere, subject to duties of retention and return.

Production Orders and Special Procedure Material

PACE Section 9 and Schedule 1

Some material cannot be obtained by an ordinary search warrant because it is subject to special protection. Section 9 of PACE 1984 and Schedule 1 establish a distinct procedure for access to "special procedure material" and, in limited circumstances, "excluded material." A production order compels the holder of such material to produce it to a constable for seizure, or to give a constable access to it. Unlike a search warrant, a production order application is made inter partes before a circuit judge, meaning the holder of the material has the opportunity to be heard and to oppose the application.

What Is Special Procedure Material?

Special procedure material is defined in section 14 of PACE. It includes material held in confidence for the purposes of a trade, business, profession, or other occupation, and journalistic material that is not excluded material. Typical examples include: bank records, medical records held in confidence, confidential business correspondence, and journalistic source material. The distinction matters because these categories receive enhanced protection, reflecting the public interest in confidentiality and press freedom.

Excluded Material

Excluded material, defined in section 11 of PACE, receives the highest level of protection. It includes: personal records held in confidence (medical, spiritual, counselling), human tissue or tissue fluid taken for medical purposes, and journalistic material held in confidence. A production order for excluded material may only be made under the "second set of access conditions" in Schedule 1 (paragraph 12), which requires a pre-existing statutory search power and proof that the conditions for that power are met. In practice, production orders for excluded material are rare and heavily scrutinised by the courts.

Journalistic Material

Journalistic material receives particular attention because of the importance of press freedom. In R v Bristol Crown Court, ex parte Bristol Press and Picture Agency (1986), the court held that the public interest in protecting journalistic sources must be weighed against the public interest in the investigation of serious crime. The Investigatory Powers Tribunal and subsequent case law have reinforced the principle that applications for journalistic material must be accompanied by compelling justification and that judges must scrutinise them with special care.

Legal Professional Privilege

Material subject to legal professional privilege is absolutely protected and may not be seized under any warrant or production order. Section 10 of PACE defines items subject to legal privilege as communications between a professional legal adviser and their client made in connection with the giving of legal advice, or in connection with legal proceedings. This privilege belongs to the client, not the lawyer, and cannot be overridden by any statute currently in force. If privileged material is seized during a search, it must be returned immediately upon the claim of privilege being raised.

The Application Process

An application for a production order under Schedule 1 must satisfy the "first set of access conditions" (paragraph 2): there must be reasonable grounds for believing that an indictable offence has been committed; that special procedure material is on the premises; that it is of substantial value to the investigation; that it is likely to be relevant evidence; and that production would be in the public interest, having regard to the benefit to the investigation and the circumstances under which the material is held. The judge must also be satisfied that other methods of obtaining the material have been tried without success or would be bound to fail.

Bench Warrants

A bench warrant is issued by a court when a person fails to appear at a hearing they were required to attend. The term "bench" refers to the judicial bench. Under section 7 of the Bail Act 1976, a person who fails to surrender to custody (fails to attend court when on bail) commits an offence and the court may issue a warrant for their arrest.

Bench warrants may also be issued under section 13 of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980, where a summons has been issued and the person fails to appear. The court may issue the warrant with or without bail. The court has discretion: it may adjourn the proceedings and issue no warrant, issue a warrant backed for bail, or issue a warrant without bail depending on the seriousness of the case and the likelihood of future attendance.

Failure to Appear as a Separate Offence

Failure to appear is a separate offence under section 6 of the Bail Act 1976, carrying a maximum penalty of 12 months' imprisonment in the Crown Court or 3 months in the magistrates' court. The prosecution must prove that the accused was released on bail, that they failed to surrender to custody at the appointed time and place, and that they had no reasonable cause for the failure. The burden of proving reasonable cause falls on the defendant. In practice, only genuine emergencies (serious illness, transport failures beyond the person's control) are accepted as reasonable cause.

Crown Court Bench Warrants

In the Crown Court, a bench warrant may be issued under section 7(1) of the Bail Act 1976 where a person granted bail fails to surrender. The Crown Court also has an inherent jurisdiction to issue bench warrants. The decision whether to issue a warrant with or without bail at this level is a matter for the trial judge, who will consider the seriousness of the offence, the stage of proceedings, and the risk of further non-attendance. Where a trial has commenced and a defendant fails to appear, the judge may continue the trial in the defendant's absence under section 11 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 if satisfied that it is in the interests of justice to do so.

Warrants of Control

A warrant of control (formerly known as a distress warrant) is used to enforce court judgments and orders by authorising the seizure and sale of a debtor's goods. The Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 and Schedule 12 provide the modern framework, replacing the patchwork of older statutes and common law rules that had governed enforcement for centuries.

County Court and High Court

In the county court, a warrant of control is issued to a county court bailiff. In the High Court, the equivalent instrument is a writ of control, issued to a High Court Enforcement Officer. For County Court money judgments of £600 or more, the creditor may request transfer to the High Court for enforcement by writ of control. For a detailed comparison and fee calculator, enforcement.uk provides a free reference.

The Three-Stage Process

The enforcement process follows three stages: compliance (7 clear days' notice, giving the debtor an opportunity to pay), enforcement (attendance at the premises and, if necessary, taking control of goods), and sale (if goods are seized and the debtor does not pay). The compliance stage requires the enforcement agent to send a notice of enforcement at least 7 clear days before attending the premises. The notice must state the amount outstanding, the authority under which the agent acts, and how to pay or dispute the debt.

At the enforcement stage, the agent may enter the debtor's premises to inspect goods and take control of them. "Taking control" means either securing goods on the premises (by way of a controlled goods agreement) or removing them to the agent's storage. The debtor may enter into a controlled goods agreement, acknowledging the agent's control over specified goods and agreeing not to remove or dispose of them. If the debtor breaches the agreement, the agent may re-enter to remove the goods.

Fees

Fees are regulated by the Taking Control of Goods (Fees) Regulations 2014. Table 1 applies to county court warrants, CRAR, and council tax: compliance stage £75, enforcement stage £235 plus 7.5% of the amount over £1,500, sale stage £110 plus 7.5% of the amount over £1,500. Table 2 applies to High Court writs: compliance stage £75, enforcement stage 1 £190 plus 7.5% over £1,000, enforcement stage 2 £495, sale stage £525 plus 7.5% over £1,000. VAT at 20% applies to High Court writs and CRAR (private enforcement agents) but not to county court warrants (bailiffs are civil servants) or council tax recovery.

Exempt Goods

Certain goods are exempt from seizure under the Taking Control of Goods Regulations 2013. These include: items or equipment necessary for use in the debtor's employment, business, trade, profession, study, or education, up to a total value of £1,350; clothing, bedding, furniture, household equipment, and provisions reasonably required for the basic domestic needs of the debtor and members of the debtor's household; and items necessary for the care of any child, elderly, or disabled person. The list of exempt goods is not exhaustive and the enforcement agent must exercise judgement in borderline cases.

Commitment Warrants

A commitment warrant authorises the imprisonment of a person, typically for contempt of court or persistent non-payment of fines. Committal for non-payment of fines is a last resort: the court must first consider all other enforcement methods (attachment of earnings, deduction from benefits, distress warrant, clamping). Only if none of these methods is likely to succeed may the court consider committal.

Under section 76 of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980, the court may commit to prison for non-payment only if it is satisfied that the default is due to the person's wilful refusal or culpable neglect. The maximum period depends on the amount outstanding: up to 7 days for sums up to £200, rising to 12 months for sums exceeding £10,000.

Committal for Contempt

Commitment warrants may also be issued for civil contempt, most commonly for breach of a court order (such as a non-molestation order or an injunction). In civil contempt proceedings, the respondent must be given notice of the alleged breach and an opportunity to be heard. The standard of proof is the criminal standard: the court must be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the respondent has breached the order. If found in contempt, the maximum sentence is two years' imprisonment under section 14 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981, though sentences are typically measured in weeks or months.

Suspended Committal Orders

The court has power to suspend a committal order on terms. A suspended committal order specifies a period of imprisonment but postpones its execution on condition that the defendant complies with certain terms, typically payment of the outstanding sum by instalments. If the defendant fails to comply with the terms of the suspended order, the warrant may be executed without further hearing, although the defendant may apply to the court for a variation of the terms.

Warrants in Family Proceedings

Child Abduction and Location Orders

In family proceedings, warrants and associated orders serve a distinct purpose: the protection of children and the enforcement of child arrangement orders. Where a child has been unlawfully removed or retained, or where there is a risk of removal from the jurisdiction, the family court has a range of powers under the Family Law Act 1986 and the Children Act 1989.

A location order under section 33 of the Family Law Act 1986 requires any person to disclose information about the whereabouts of a child. The court may direct the order at any person, including government departments, local authorities, and private individuals. Failure to comply with a location order without reasonable excuse is a contempt of court.

Collection Orders and Recovery Orders

Under section 34 of the Family Law Act 1986, the court may make a collection order authorising a court officer to take charge of the child and deliver the child to the applicant. Where a collection order is not sufficient, section 34 also empowers the court to authorise an officer of the court to enter premises and search for the child. A recovery order under section 50 of the Children Act 1989 may be made where a child is in care, is the subject of an emergency protection order, or is in police protection, and has been unlawfully taken or kept away from the responsible person.

Passport Surrender Orders

Under section 37 of the Family Law Act 1986 (as applied by case law), the court may require the surrender of a child's passport to prevent removal from the jurisdiction. This power is frequently used alongside a prohibited steps order (section 8 of the Children Act 1989) preventing a parent from removing the child from England and Wales without the consent of the other parent or the permission of the court. Where there is an immediate risk of removal, the court may make these orders without notice to the other party.

Port Alert

In cases of imminent risk, the court or a party may request a "port alert" from the police, asking that all ports and airports be notified to prevent the child from being taken out of the country. A port alert lasts for 28 days (renewable). It is an administrative measure rather than a court order, but it is a practical and immediate tool for preventing abduction while the court process catches up.

Extradition and European Arrest Warrants

The Extradition Act 2003 governs extradition from the United Kingdom. Since the end of the Brexit transition period (1 January 2021), European Arrest Warrants (EAWs) no longer apply to the UK. They were replaced by the UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement surrender arrangements, which operate similarly but with additional safeguards (including a dual criminality requirement and a bar on surrender of own nationals in some circumstances).

Part 1: Category 1 Territories

Part 1 of the Extradition Act 2003 governs surrender to "Category 1 territories," which since 1 January 2021 means EU member states operating under the TCA arrangements. The requesting state must issue an arrest warrant, which is certified by the National Crime Agency (NCA). The district judge must be satisfied that the offence meets the dual criminality requirement (the conduct would also be an offence in the UK), that none of the statutory bars to extradition applies, and that extradition would be compatible with the person's Convention rights.

Part 2: Category 2 Territories

Extradition requests from non-EU countries are handled under Part 2 of the Extradition Act 2003, which requires a formal request through diplomatic channels. The Secretary of State issues a certificate, and the person is brought before a district judge. The judge considers dual criminality, bars to extradition, passage of time, and human rights. For an overview of how appeal routes apply in extradition cases, further reference is available at no cost.

Bars to Extradition

The Extradition Act 2003 provides several bars to extradition: the rule against double jeopardy (the person has already been convicted or acquitted of the same offence in the UK), the passage of time (it would be unjust to extradite because of the time elapsed), hostage-taking considerations, the person's physical or mental condition, and the absence of a prosecution decision. Forum bars, introduced by the Crime and Courts Act 2013, allow a judge to bar extradition where a substantial measure of the relevant activity was performed in the UK and it would not be in the interests of justice to extradite.

Execution of Warrants

Who May Execute a Warrant

The person authorised to execute a warrant depends on its type. Arrest warrants are generally executed by police constables. A constable may execute an arrest warrant at any location within England and Wales, regardless of which court issued it. Civilian enforcement officers may execute certain warrants, particularly those related to fine enforcement. Search warrants under PACE are executed by police officers, who may be accompanied by other persons (such as forensic specialists) as necessary. Warrants of control are executed by county court bailiffs (county court) or High Court Enforcement Officers (High Court). Extradition warrants are executed by NCA officers or by constables.

Time of Day

The rules on timing vary by warrant type. Search warrants under PACE must generally be executed at a "reasonable hour" unless the officer executing the warrant reasonably believes that the purpose of the search would be frustrated. PACE Code B and section 16(4) require execution at a "reasonable hour" but do not specify particular hours, though this is guidance rather than a rigid rule. For warrants of control under TCEA 2007, Schedule 12, enforcement agents may only attend between 6am and 9pm unless the debtor's premises are commercial and open outside those hours. Arrest warrants may be executed at any time, day or night.

Use of Force

The use of force to execute a warrant must be reasonable and proportionate. Under section 117 of PACE, a constable may use reasonable force in the exercise of any power conferred by PACE. For search warrants, this includes forcing entry to premises where entry is refused or where no one is present. The officer must first attempt to gain entry by peaceful means unless doing so would alert the occupant and frustrate the search. For warrants of control, the enforcement agent may use reasonable force to enter commercial premises on the first visit, but may only use force to enter domestic premises on a subsequent visit (not the first visit) and only where a controlled goods agreement has been breached or where goods have been removed to avoid seizure.

Duty to Show the Warrant

A person executing a warrant must produce it on request. Under PACE section 16(5), the officer must, before the search begins, identify themselves to the occupier, produce the warrant, and supply a copy. For arrest warrants, the arresting officer must inform the person of the fact of the arrest and the reason for it as soon as practicable (PACE s.28). For warrants of control, the enforcement agent must produce the warrant and a notice of enforcement before entering the premises.

Retention and Return of Seized Material

Material seized under a search warrant may be retained for as long as is necessary for the purposes of the investigation. Under PACE section 22, anything seized by a constable may be retained so long as is necessary in all the circumstances, including for use as evidence at trial, for forensic examination, or for other investigation-related purposes. However, material must not be retained if a photograph or copy would suffice (s.22(4)). Material that is not required for the investigation must be returned to the person from whom it was seized. If there is a dispute about retention, the person may apply to the Crown Court under section 59 of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 for the return of the property.

Challenging a Warrant

Judicial Review

A person affected by a warrant may challenge it by way of judicial review in the Administrative Court (part of the King's Bench Division of the High Court). The grounds for challenge include: that the magistrate had no jurisdiction to issue the warrant; that the statutory conditions were not met; that the application was procedurally defective (for example, the applicant failed in the duty of full and frank disclosure); or that the decision to issue the warrant was irrational in the Wednesbury sense.

In R (Faisaltex Ltd) v Preston Crown Court [2008] EWHC 2832 (Admin), the court quashed a search warrant because the applicant had failed to disclose material facts to the issuing judge. In R (Cronin) v Sheffield Magistrates' Court [2002] EWHC 2568 (Admin), the court held that the magistrate's failure to inquire into the grounds of the application rendered the warrant unlawful.

Section 78 PACE: Exclusion of Evidence

Even where a warrant is not formally quashed, evidence obtained under it may be excluded at trial. Section 78 of PACE 1984 gives the court a discretion to refuse to allow evidence on which the prosecution proposes to rely if, having regard to all the circumstances (including the circumstances in which the evidence was obtained), the admission of the evidence would have such an adverse effect on the fairness of the proceedings that the court ought not to admit it.

Section 78 has been used to exclude evidence where: the warrant was defective on its face; the officer executing the warrant exceeded its scope; material subject to legal professional privilege was seized; or the search was conducted in a manner that violated PACE Code B. The court considers all the circumstances, including whether the officers acted in good faith and whether the breach was serious or merely technical.

Civil Claims

A person whose property has been unlawfully searched or seized may bring a civil claim for damages. Potential causes of action include: trespass to land (where entry was without lawful authority), trespass to goods (where property was seized without lawful authority), and breach of the right to respect for private life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (given effect in domestic law by the Human Rights Act 1998). Damages may be awarded for the interference itself and for any consequential loss, including damage to property and distress.

Return of Seized Property

Where property has been seized and the person disputes the lawfulness of the seizure or the continued retention of the property, the person may apply to the Crown Court under section 59 of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 for the return of the property. The court has power to order the return of the property and, in appropriate cases, the deletion of copies or images taken from it. Applications under the Police (Property) Act 1897 may also be made for the return of property in police possession where no criminal proceedings are contemplated.

Key Legislation

The following statutes form the principal legal framework for warrants in England and Wales. Each has been linked to a free reference where available.