Part 5: Equipment interference Section 110: Failure to approve warrant issued in urgent case
If a Judicial Commissioner refuses to approve the decision to issue a warrant, those exercising powers under the warrant must, as far and as quickly as they can, stop any activity being undertaken.
	A Judicial Commissioner can determine what can happen to any material obtained under an urgent warrant that has not been approved. Subsection (5) provides for representations to be made to the Judicial Commissioner by the person who issued the urgent warrant or the authority who applied for it.
	Subsection (3) provides that a Judicial Commissioner has the power to authorise additional equipment interference after refusing to approve a warrant, where such interference is necessary to ensure any ongoing interference ceases as soon as possible.
	Subsections (7) and (8) provide for the person who issued an urgent warrant to ask the Investigatory Powers Commissioner to review a Judicial Commissioner’s decision as to what can happen to any material obtained under an urgent warrant that the Commissioner refused to approve. The Investigatory Powers Commissioner can confirm the Judicial Commissioner’s decision or make a fresh determination.
	Subsection (9) provides that the urgent warrant being cancelled does not mean that anything already done under the warrant is unlawful, this is also the case for anything that it is not reasonably practicable to stop doing.