Criminal law – Procedure. A sub-contracted court security guard was not a court officer with implied authority to accept informations against the appellants for alleged offences under the Housing Act 2004, within Crim PR 4.3(1)(e). The Divisional Court further held that, the informations against the appellants had not been laid in time, as they had been given to the guard on the last day of the available six months' period and, by the time the informations were passed to the court's administrative staff, they were out of time.