Knife Law

[GavinBear]

The news is full of reports concerning the new 'Zombie knife' regulations, which reminded me of something.

Can someone please explain the position of the phrase

"Application for leave to appeal to the House of Lords refused, but point of general public importance certified as follows: "

at the end of an appeal case report.

I've always understood it to mean that although the appeal failed,(usually on a technical point) an important point was raised and the certified 'point of general public importance' is intended to clear up any further discussions on that particular matter.
If this is so, what does the last paragraph of the Deegan appeal, reproduced below, really mean? To me it suggests that the 'lock' part is largely irrelevant as long as the knife has a blade that folds.

Application for leave to appeal to the House of Lords refused, but point of general public importance certified as follows:
'That the article 'a folding pocket knife' as mentioned in section 139(2) Criminal Justice Act 1988 as being an exemption subject to subsection (3) to the offence made by section 139(1) means a knife that has a blade that folds, whether or not it (the blade) is capable of being opened and locked into an open position and equally capable of being folded once the mechanism had been operated to unlock the blade.'

[atticus]

Appeals to the Supreme Court are subject to 2 conditions:

1. The Court below has certified that there is a point of general public importance (GPI)

2. Permission to appeal.

If the lower court refuses permission to appeal, that permission may be sought from the SC. This is where the question of GPI comes in. If the SC grants permission to appeal, the first condition is also satisfied.

[shootist]

But it is important to remember that if even one zombie life is saved then it will all have been worthwhile.

[atticus]

Off topic, but absolutely correct.

If zombies have lives, that is.

[GavinBear]

Appeals to the Supreme Court are subject to 2 conditions:

1. The Court below has certified that there is a point of general public importance (GPI)

2. Permission to appeal.

If the lower court refuses permission to appeal, that permission may be sought from the SC. This is where the question of GPI comes in. If the SC grants permission to appeal, the first condition is also satisfied.

So where does that leave the point raised?
Is it a statement or a question?

Taking the basic English interpretation of the statement, a lock knife can be a folding knife.
Is the option, to appeal BASED on the point? or is it to address the accuracy of the point?

As for the Zombies? Am I allowed to kill them or not?

[3.14]

Coming in bright colours and emblazoned with words like “zombie killer” and “slayer” the large knives look far more intimidating than a normal knife.

What is the difference between a 'zombie' knife and a knife? Why does it need special legislation?

[atticus]

It leaves the question about certifying a question of general public importance answered.

In the words quoted, the judge defined the question that he certified as being of GPI.

[dls]

It is not an easy sentence, but such a point would be asking the supreme court to decide the meaning of section 139(1). What kinds of knife are included (nothing to do with the zombie knife discussion).
In effect it is as as to the relevance of the particular 'locking' system for the exemption.

[shootist]

Coming in bright colours and emblazoned with words like “zombie killer” and “slayer” the large knives look far more intimidating than a normal knife.

What is the difference between a 'zombie' knife and a knife? Why does it need special legislation?

Something needs to be done about zombie knives. This is something therefore it must be done.