Mobile phones and the Law

The statutory definition of “public place” contained within the Prevention of Crime Act 1953 at section 1(4) is not very helpful but states it ‘includes any highway and any other premises of place to which at the material time the public have or are permitted to have access, whether on payment or otherwise’.

Institutions to which the public have access such as churches and museums, however, may own the land, making these a ‘private’ setting which has a significant effect on the need for permission to take photographs.

Note that a vehicle is also considered as a public place, unless it was parked on private property at the time. This presumably means that photographs and video can be taken of or inside a vehicle, and may be relevant in terms of photographing unsecured firearms or offensive weapons as “Possessing an offensive weapon in a public place is an offence contrary to s 1 of the Prevention of Crime Act 1953”.

Yes. There is no law preventing people from taking photographs in public or in a public place. This includes taking photos of other people’s children.

Photographs taken while ON private land, however, require the land owner’s permission, and taking a photo of a person where they can expect privacy, such as inside their home or garden, may cause a breach of privacy laws. 

Unless the images which have been taken are indecent, though, or might be considered harrassment no one has the right to:

• ask a photographer to stop
• ask for a copy of the photos 
• force a photographer to delete the photographs

They can ask, yes, but if the filming or recording is in a public place then we are allowed to refuse their request and continue filming – unless the image is being taken for purposes of crime or terrorism. This is true whether taking still photos or video in one form or another.

However, several websites suggest that if despite being asked to stop the photographer continues persistent or aggressive photography and their conduct causes alarm or distress, this may be considered as harassment.

• ‘Persistent’ is apparently a difficult concept to define in law, but does suggest something that continues to exist or happen for a long time. It seems unlikely then that taking a photograph while following a hunt for a day could be considered harrassment in itself.

• In law, ‘harrassment’ is when a person behaves in a way which is intended to cause distress or alarm. The behaviour must happen on more than one occasion. It can be the same type of behaviour or different types of behaviour on each occasion.

If we’ve taken photographs at eg a hunt, could the riders or hunt supporters claim ‘image rights’ in an attempt to stop images being used or published?

No. Unlike many other countries, the UK (currently) doesn’t have an ‘image right’ or ‘character right’ which allows an individual to control the use of his or her name or image.

There are of course a number of other laws which could make using an image unlawful, such as defamation (harming the good reputation of an individual) or passing off (using an image to falsely suggest an endorsement when advertising goods for example), but no one can legitimately claim that they have ‘image rights’.

If the image has been legally obtained and has not been manipulated or edited to suggest something that hasn’t actually taken place, there seems to be no law stopping us from using it (especially if it is ‘in the public interest’).

What if we take or have taken a video at a hunt or wildlife crime scene that then goes viral?

In a November 2022  article by Dr Hayleigh Bosher (and published in The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence) the following points were raised:

• Privacy rights are protected by the UK Human Rights Act 1998, which aims to prevent other people from interfering with your life. It stipulates that personal information about you, including photographs and correspondence such as letters and emails, shouldn’t be shared publicly without your permission. Other personal information, such as your address and telephone number, is protected under the Data Protection Act 2018.
• However, privacy law only applies where there is a “reasonable expectation of privacy”. This means rights would be breached if someone hacked into a phone and stole private photos, but not necessarily if a photo taken in a public place was published. 
• Defamation law could protect an individual if someone uses an image in a defamatory way. The legal test means the image has to cause, or is likely to cause, serious harm to your reputation and only applies if what the person shares is untrue. So if the photo is real this is unlikely to apply – if the image has been manipulated to make it look like look like an individual is doing something they didn’t, then defamation law could apply.
• Privacy is a qualified right, meaning that it can be breached under certain circumstances, such as if it is in the public interest. This could be a useful defence for publishing  photos [or video] of high-profile politicians whose behaviour may reflect something important about their leadership [or in a Protectors of the Wild context, it could be argued that it is in the public interest to show a huntsman or hunt supporter breaking the law or inflicting cruelty or suffering on an animal].

No. Using a mobile phone while driving was banned in 2003, but the law was strengthened in 2022. From 25 March 2022 it became illegal in England, Scotland, and Wales for a driver to hold and use a phone, sat nav, tablet, or any device that can send or receive data, while driving or riding a motorcycle or quad bike.

Note that an accident does not need to happen for an offence to be committed.

This means a driver (but NOT a passenger who is not in control of the vehicle) must not use a device in their hand for any reason, whether online or offline. This includes texting, making calls, taking photos or videos, or browsing the web.

The law still applies if the driver is:

• stopped at traffic lights
• queuing in traffic
• supervising a learner driver
• driving a car that turns off the engine when the car stops moving
• holding and using a device that’s offline or in flight mode

The standard penalty for being caught using a handheld mobile phone when driving is six penalty points and a £200 fine. 

Exceptions

A device can be held in hand if an individual:

• needs to call 999 or 112 in an emergency and it’s unsafe or impractical to stop
• is safely parked
• is making a contactless payment in a vehicle that is not moving, for example at a drive-through restaurant
• is using the device to park a vehicle remotely.

Using devices hands-free

Devices with hands-free access can be used, as long as they are not held at any time during usage and do not block the view of the road and traffic ahead. Hands-free access means using, for example:

• a Bluetooth headset
• voice command
• a dashboard holder or mat
• a windscreen mount
• a built-in sat nav

The legal advice seems to be confusing. For example, the NFU Mutual Insurance company states on its website that “using your mobile phone whilst riding is illegal and very dangerous“, but in a written answer the  UK government said in May 2020 that it had no current plans to introduce new penalties for cyclists and horse riders using mobile phones while riding. The Northern Ireland government says to “Always carry a mobile phone (or money for a public phone) in case of an emergency, but make sure all mobile electrical equipment you carry is switched off while riding, so that you can hear clearly.”

However, legal issues might arise if a rider causes an accident while using a mobile phone.

All road users (including horse riders) are required to comply with road traffic law in the interests of their own safety and that of other road users. The Official Highway Code explains the law and gives advice for cyclists and horse riders on how to safely use roads.

Rule 53 states clearly that equestrians should [note, not MUST] keep both hands on the reins, unless when signalling, so should not be using mobile phones while riding, unless in an emergency.

British Horse Society director of safety Alan Hiscox was also quoted in May 2020 saying: “As vulnerable road users, it is vitally important horse riders and carriage drivers adhere to the rules of the Highway Code when riding on the road.

“While remaining safe on the roads is not always fully in our control, we are all responsible for ensuring we keep ourselves as safe, as visible and as in control as possible.”

Ian Dexter of HorseSolicitor says that should a rider be proven to be on the phone when an accident occurred, and a related claim went to court, the opposition could argue contributory negligence on the rider’s part; that the rider was not paying full attention to the road so was partly at fault.

• Interestingly, under the Licensing Act 1872, it is an offence to be drunk in charge of a horse (and a carriage cow or steam engine, or whilst in possession of a loaded firearm).

A passenger in a moving vehicle can legally film you, but there are no circumstances under which a person driving a moving vehicle can use a phone or video camera while they are driving.

Any incidents should be reported to the police citing Regulation 110 of the Road Vehicles (Construction & Use) Regulations 1986.

No. Because there is no expectation of privacy in public places, in general (unless taking indecent images or harassing or stalking over a period of time) anyone taking photos in public is not breaking any laws and if an individual damages or confiscates (takes) another person’s phone or camera they are potentially breaking the Theft Act 1968 and possibly assaulting a person in the process.

• Theft is defined by section 1 Theft Act 1968 as ‘dishonestly appropriating property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it’.
• Robbery is defined by Section 8(1) Theft Act 1968 as ‘A person is guilty of robbery if the person steals, and immediately before or at the time of doing so, and in order to do so, they use force on any person or puts or seeks to put any person in fear of being then and there subjected to force.’
• Offences of assault fall under the Offences against the Person Act 1861, the Criminal Justice Act 1988 and the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. Common assault is when a person inflicts violence on someone else or makes them think they are going to be attacked and does not have to involve physical violence. Threatening words or a raised fist is enough for the crime to have been committed provided the victim thinks that they are about to be attacked. Spitting at someone is another example of common assault. (For more see our Protectors page > Assault and the Law.)

The law usually refers to taking and creating an ‘image’ (or images) – which includes all types of visual content, including still photography (digital or film), motion film or video.

From what we can find there doesn’t seem to be a difference in the way UK law separates a photograph from a video (which is in effect a series of images), or any difference in how that might impact someone being photographed or filmed in terms of consent or usage.

Yes if it is in a public place recording footage of a police incident, or taking photographs of their actions, is legal.

If officers say that recording them is obstructing them in their policing duties, the advice is to step back from the area but to continue filming as police have no legal powers to stop someone filming incidents in public areas.

No. As long as the photographer is not trespassing on private property and not deliberately harassing anyone, they do not need permission to take photos in a public area and the police have no powers to stop them from taking pictures. That includes taking photos of police officers themselves.

No, they can not.

Police officers do not have the power to delete digital images or destroy film – even during a search. Deletion or destruction may only take place following seizure of the phone (or camera) if there is a lawful power (such as a court order) that permits such deletion or destruction.

Note that individuals generally can not delete (or force someone to delete) photographs or videos – that includes land owners, land agents, hunt masters, and gamekeepers.

An FOI (Freedom of information request reference no: 01.FOI.22.023971) published on the Metropolitan Police website, says the following:

“It is not an offence to film a Police station, if spotted, Police officers can approach and ask questions as to what the individual is doing and why. If the officer suspects possible Terrorism Offences then the power to search, seize could come into effect.

If an individual wants to film outside one of our stations, or film the building itself then we ask them to make contact with us so we can ask questions as to what the project is and how we would manage it.

There is also the issue of Intellectual Property Rights, filming MPS logos, trademarks that, legitimate filming productions have to apply and pay a fee if approved.

There are situations where people turn up at Police stations, videoing, taking photos and wanting a reaction from the Police. The officers obviously have a right to question such activity but if the investigating officer(s) are satisfied that there are no apparent offences and a threat to security then there is no law being broken.”

OperationSNAP is a police response to the increasing amount of mobile phone and dashcam video evidence of driving offences being sent to them by the public. It is operated across Wales (where it was first launched) and England.

According to (for example) GoSafeSnap Wales: “Operation SNAP is a response to increasing submissions of video and photographic evidence relating to driving offences that members of the public have witnessed. Until now, these reports have been submitted to the police in all sorts of ways and so a streamlined process has now been developed to deal with them. This will hopefully make it easier for all involved.”

Operation Snap will investigate offences of Dangerous Driving, Driving without Due Care and Attention, Careless Driving, using a mobile phone, not wearing a seat belt, contravening a red traffic light, contravening solid white lines, and other offences where the driver is clearly not in proper control of the vehicle.

Many forces now operate Operation SNAP and a standard reporting form is available on many of their websites. Note that the types of offences that Operation Snap deal with generally have a six month time limit for prosecution, so any footage needs to be uploaded as quickly as possible.

• Operation SNAP deals with traffic offences, it is NOT for submitting footage of Road Traffic Collisions (RTCs) or public order offences. Any reports of parking offences should be referred to the relevant highway authority in the locality where it occurred.

Wildlife crime is defined as any action which contravenes current legislation governing the protection of the UK’s wild flora and fauna, including species traded in the UK.

Note that wildlife crime does NOT include:

• Incidents involving domestic or companion animals such as dogs (other than dogs being used to hunt mammals), cats, rabbits, domesticated birds, etc.

• Wild animals that have been involved (killed or injured etc) in road traffic accidents.

Road accidents with wild animals do not need to be reported to the police, but note that domestic animals (as well as goats, horses, cattle, asses, mules, sheep and pigs) come within the remit of the Road Traffic Act.
If you have a road accident involving these animals you are required by law to report it to the police. If the wild animal is so badly injured in a road accident that there is no chance of recovery or the animal can not be returned to the wild then he or she may be euthanised, providing there is no appropriate long-term captive or semi-captive accommodation or when treatment would involve undue suffering or distress.

If we come across a wildlife crime scene or a dead bird/object that may be related to a wildlife crime every piece of information is – or might be – important, but it needs to be recorded properly and accurately for the authorities to have a chance of prosecuting an offender.

• Before we do anything else it is very important that we do NOT approach anyone we suspect of committing a crime – they may be violent and/or aggressive. This is especially true of badger baiters and hare coursers who are typically extremely violent. This must be a first priority!

If we see a wildlife crime taking place (or someone is at risk of getting injured or is being threatened) call 999 immediately.

They will want to know what we can see happening:

• What sort of crime is being committed
• Are any firearms involved
• Could we or the public be in danger

To report a historic crime – that is, a crime that is no longer taking place – use 101 or a local organisation instead.

• If calling the police ask to speak to a Wildlife Crime Officer and make sure to get an Incident Report number.
• Please always follow any advice given and – if they are not available – insist that a Wildlife Crime Officer is made aware of your report.
•  Our options are wider if the event is over, and it may be preferable to talk first to a charity or NGO to get advice. Crimestoppers (an independent charity) can be contacted in complete confidence on 0800 555 111
• When thinking about reporting a crime it’s worth noting that only the police have statutory powers to make an arrest. RSPCA and RSPB investigation officers work with the police for successful prosecutions.

Reporting a wildlife crime (or even a suspected wildlife crime) is important for two reasons.

• If the event is still happening it may enable the authorities to catch the criminals ‘in the act’ (which means a higher chance of prosecution),
• and if the event is over a report can still help to build up a more accurate picture of what might be happening in a specific location or across the country as a whole.

Our help is always welcomed

• Whoever we decide to contact we have been assured that our help is welcomed and that if we’re in any doubt that what we’re seeing is a crime we should report it anyway. Remember, if what we see ‘feels’ wrong, it probably is!

• Even if we’re not sure about what we’re seeing, we can take a photograph and email it to the police or an investigations officer – they are trained to quickly recognise for example when a snare is illegally placed, whether a trap is being used illegally, or whether a crime is being committed or not.
• We may help stop or solve future crimes by helping build up a pattern of behaviour in an area.