Sexual offences – Sexual offences prevention order. The district judge refused to discharge a sexual offences prevention order made against the appellant, following his conviction for serious sexual offences in Romania and a 15 year old boy staying at his flat. The appellant appealed by way of case stated. The Divisional Court, in dismissing the appeal, held that the judge had been right to say that the appellant could not seek to adduce evidence in an attempt to undermine the decisions to make the order and dismissing his appeal against that decision. Since that had been the purpose of the boy's evidence, the judge had been entitled to say that it had not been relevant.