ordinary residence of the Complainants as at 11 January 2008. Their ordinary
residence at that date was stated to be at a property in the catchment area of
the particular local education authority school for which Ms Paton had applied
for a place for the Complainant C5 from September 2008.
C. The main issue in the case
9.
The main issue which the Tribunal have to determine is whether the directed
surveillance admittedly carried out by the Council of the activities of each of the
Complainants was necessary for the prevention or detection of crime and was
proportionate to what was sought to be achieved by carrying it out.
D. Findings of fact
10.
As a result of their investigation into and consideration of the complaints the
Tribunal find the following facts.
I. The authorisation
11.
The circumstances and the terms in which the surveillance operation was
authorised are central to the consideration and determination of the
complaints.
12.
On 8 February 2008 an application for authorisation of the carrying out of
directed surveillance of the Complainants was made and granted. The
authorisation was requested under Part II of RIPA by the Head of the
Council’s Children & Young People’s Integrated Services. It was granted by
the Council’s Head of Legal and Democratic Services. The form used as the
Page 4