application for, and grant of, authorisation was an official Home Office Form.
On 17 April 2008 the authorisation was formally cancelled.
13.
In describing the purpose of the specific operation the form stated in Box 2 “Complaint received by LA [local authority] that applicants for a
school place in September 2008 have knowingly used a fraudulent
in-catchment area address to obtain a place at the [name of] school.
Complainant has given their full name and address.”
14.
The surveillance operation for which authorisation was sought was stated to be
as follows in Box 3“Officer will keep 2 addresses under surveillance to ascertain where
applicants are living. Addresses are Property 1 and Property
2…Vehicles used by the family will be observed and may be
followed ….Surveillance may include use of digital camera to
record images of persons entering and/or exiting both addresses.”
15.
The identities of the subjects of the directed surveillance were stated in Box 4
to be all the Complainants of both addresses Property 1 and Property 2.
16.
The information which it was desired to obtain as a result of the directed
surveillance was stated in Box 5 to be“Establishing the permanent home address of C5 who is the subject
of an application for a school place.”
17.
The grounds on which the directed surveillance was necessary under section
28(3) RIPA were identified in Box 6“In the interests of national security;
For the purpose of preventing or detecting crime or preventing
disorder.”
18.
The form did not identify any specific crime to be prevented or detected or any
disorder to be prevented. The only potential crime asserted by the Council at
Page 5