R (on the application of Hoque) v City of London Magistrates Court and another [2013] All ER (D) 158 (Mar)
It was settled law that it was not the function of the Divisional Court to look for deficiencies in the wording of a search warrant provided that, so far as practicable, the articles for which the search had been authorised had been identified. Further, s 8 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) fulfilled a purpose which was different to that of s 15 of PACE. While s 8 regulated the requirements for jurisdiction to issue a search warrant and s 8(2) permitted a constable only to remove anything for which the search was authorised by the warrant, s 15 required identification in the warrant of articles for which authority had been given. It followed that it was the responsibility of the justice of the peace to ensure the compliance of the warrant with the requirements of s 15.
