Foul and abusive language, along with threatening behaviour, can have significant legal consequences under the Public Order Act 1986 and other legislation.
These laws aim to maintain public safety, prevent disorder, and protect individuals from harassment or distress.
The Public Order Act 1986
The Public Order Act 1986 is the primary piece of legislation in the UK addressing behaviour that disrupts public order, including the use of foul, abusive, or threatening language and behaviour.
Public Order Act 1986 – Section 5
- This is the least serious offense, covering the use of threatening or abusive words or behaviour (or disorderly behaviour) likely to cause harassment, alarm, or distress to someone within hearing or sight. Since 2014, the term “insulting” was removed from this section, meaning only threatening or abusive language applies. No intent is required, but the prosecution must show someone was likely to be affected, even if no one actually was. The maximum penalty is a fine up to £1,000. Defences include proving the conduct was reasonable or that the defendant had no reason to believe anyone would be affected.
For an offense to be committed under Section 5:
- The behaviour must occur in a public or private place (though not within a dwelling unless it affects someone outside).
- There must be intent to cause harassment, alarm, or distress, or the behaviour must be likely to do so.
- No actual victim needs to be present; it is enough that the behaviour could reasonably cause distress to someone who might witness it.
Example: Shouting profanities or abusive insults in a public place, such as a street or park, could lead to a Section 5 offense if it alarms or distresses passersby.
Public Order Act 1986 – Section 4A
- This offense involves threatening, abusive, or insulting words or behaviour with the intent to cause harassment, alarm, or distress, and it must actually cause such effects to someone (not necessarily the targeted person). It carries a higher penalty than Section 5, with up to 6 months imprisonment or a fine up to £5,000. A defence exists if the conduct was reasonable or occurred inside a dwelling where it wasn’t heard outside.
- Section 4: This covers threatening, abusive, or insulting words or behaviour with the intent to cause another person to fear immediate unlawful violence or to provoke such violence. It’s more serious, with a maximum penalty of 6 months imprisonment (or up to 2 years if racially or religiously aggravated). Like other sections, it doesn’t apply inside a dwelling if both parties are inside.
Key Notes:
- The term “insulting” was removed from Section 5 in 2014 following campaigns arguing it restricted free speech, but it remains in Sections 4 and 4A.
- Context matters: Courts assess whether language is abusive or threatening based on circumstances, not just the words used. For example, swearing at police may not always qualify unless it exceeds what officers typically encounter.
- Dwelling Exception: No offense under these sections is committed if the language is used inside a dwelling (e.g., a home) and only heard by others inside that or another dwelling.
- Racially or Religiously Aggravated Offenses: If the language involves hostility based on race or religion, penalties increase under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998.
- Free Speech Defence: Sections 4A and 5 allow a defence if the conduct was reasonable, interpreted in light of freedom of expression under the Human Rights Act. Prosecutions must be necessary and proportionate.
Examples:
- Shouting abusive slurs in public could fall under Section 5 if it’s likely to cause distress, or Section 4A if intended to distress someone who is actually affected.
- Threatening language causing fear of immediate violence could trigger Section 4.
- Cases like DPP v Harvey (2011) show that swearing alone (e.g., “fuck”) may not suffice for a conviction if no one is shown to be alarmed or distressed.
Public Order Act 1986 – Section 3
Section 3 addresses affray, which involves using or threatening unlawful violence in a way that would cause a person of reasonable firmness to fear for their safety. This could include threatening behaviour in a public setting, such as brandishing a weapon or engaging in violent acts accompanied by abusive language.
Penalties: Affray carries a maximum penalty of seven years’ imprisonment.
Other Relevant Legislation
While the Public Order Act 1986 is the cornerstone for addressing foul language and threatening behaviour, other laws may also apply depending on the context:
Communications Act 2003
Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 addresses foul, abusive, or threatening language in online or electronic communications. It criminalises sending messages that are grossly offensive, indecent, obscene, or menacing via public communication networks (e.g., social media, text messages, or emails).
Example: Posting abusive or threatening comments on platforms like X could lead to prosecution under this section.
Penalties: Up to six months’ imprisonment or a fine.
Protection from Harassment Act 1997
The Protection from Harassment Act 1997 addresses harassment, which can include repeated abusive language or threatening behaviour that causes distress. Section 2 makes it an offense to pursue a course of conduct that amounts to harassment, while Section 4 covers conduct causing fear of violence.
Penalties: Harassment can lead to up to six months’ imprisonment, while causing fear of violence carries a maximum of seven years.
Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994
The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 extended the powers of the police to deal with public order offenses, including those involving abusive or threatening behaviour at public events or gatherings. It also introduced provisions for tackling antisocial behaviour, which may overlap with foul language or threatening conduct.
Malicious Communications Act 1988
The Malicious Communications Act 1988 targets communications (letters, electronic messages, etc.) that are indecent, grossly offensive, or threatening with the intent to cause distress or anxiety. It overlaps with the Communications Act 2003 but focuses specifically on malicious intent.
Penalties: Up to seven years’ imprisonment for serious cases.
Hate Crime Legislation
If foul or abusive language is motivated by hostility toward protected characteristics (e.g., race, religion, sexual orientation, disability, or transgender identity), it may be prosecuted as a hate crime under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 or as an aggravated offense under the Criminal Justice Act 2003. Courts may impose harsher penalties for offenses with a hate element.
Example: Using racially abusive language in a public place could lead to charges under the Public Order Act with an aggravated penalty due to racial hostility.
Contextual Factors and Defences
When determining whether foul language or threatening behaviour constitutes an offence, courts consider:
- Context: Was the language used in a heated argument, a public protest, or a private setting? Context can affect whether the behaviour is deemed likely to cause distress.
- Intent: Public Order Act 1986 Sections 4 and 4A require proof of intent, while Section 5 does not.
- Reasonableness: Courts assess whether a “reasonable person” would find the behaviour threatening or distressing.
Defences may include:
- The behaviour was not intended to cause distress or alarm.
- The language or behaviour occurred in a private setting with no public impact.
- The conduct was reasonable in the circumstances (e.g., part of a lawful protest).
Real-World Application
Foul and abusive language often becomes a legal issue in public spaces like streets, public transport, or sporting events. For example:
- A person shouting profanities at a bus driver could be charged under Section 5 for causing distress.
- Threatening a shopkeeper with violence while using abusive language could lead to a Section 4 charge.
- Posting threatening messages on X targeting an individual could result in prosecution under the Communications Act 2003 or Malicious Communications Act 1988.
Police and prosecutors also consider public interest when deciding whether to charge someone. Minor incidents may result in warnings or community resolutions rather than formal prosecution.
Conclusion
Foul and abusive language and threatening behaviour are addressed through a robust framework of UK legislation, primarily the Public Order Act 1986, alongside laws like the Communications Act 2003, Protection from Harassment Act 1997, and Malicious Communications Act 1988.
Understanding the scope of these laws is crucial for navigating public interactions, both in physical spaces and online, and for fostering a respectful and safe society.
Check out our articles on the Justice System, Open Justice, Rule of Law, R v Sussex Justices, Victims’ Right to Review, Litigants in Person, McKenzie Friend, Do you Have to Bow to a Judge ?, Can you Email a Judge ?, Can you Criticise a Judge ? and the highly dubious Sussex Family Justice Board.
The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession or any law enforcement agencies.
Most Popular ↓
What is Policing by Consent ? What is Two Tier Policing ?
Latest Articles ↓
- Can a Solicitor or Barrister Mislead a Court ?
In England and Wales, the legal system demands integrity and truth from all legal professionals involved in court proceedings. Solicitors and barristers are bound by… Read more: Can a Solicitor or Barrister Mislead a Court ? - What is the Forensic Science Regulator ?
Forensic science is a cornerstone of modern criminal justice, providing critical evidence that can make or break a case. However, the reliability and accuracy of… Read more: What is the Forensic Science Regulator ? - What is the Criminal Cases Review Commission ?
The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) stands as a vital institution within the criminal justice system, dedicated to investigating potential miscarriages of justice. Established in… Read more: What is the Criminal Cases Review Commission ? - Did Bobby Vylan and the BBC break the law at Glastonbury 2025 ?
The performance by Bob Vylan at Glastonbury 2025, where frontman Bobby Vylan (reportedly Pascal Robinson-Foster) led chants of “death, death to the IDF” and “from… Read more: Did Bobby Vylan and the BBC break the law at Glastonbury 2025 ?
All Articles can be found in the Legal Blog or Sitemap.
You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).
‘Justice delayed is justice denied’
William Ewart Gladstone
There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.
Foul and Abusive Language was last updated on the 8th July 2025
