A person detained as a person of unsound mind should not be kept in a prison, but if the institution concerned is within the appropriate category, there is no breach of Article 5. While measures depriving a person of his liberty often involve an element of suffering or humiliation, it cannot be said that detention … Continue reading Aerts v Belgium: ECHR 30 Jul 1998
The appellant had been charged with and disciplined for a prison offence. He was refused legal assistance at his hearing, and it was accepted that the proceedings involved the determination of a criminal charge within the meaning of article 6 of the Convention, that the deputy controller was not an independent tribunal and that the … Continue reading Greenfield, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 16 Feb 2005
Balancing Rights of Prisoner and Society The appellant had been convicted of the murder of three police officers in 1966. His tariff of thirty years had now long expired. He complained that material put before the Parole Board reviewing has case had not been disclosed to him. Held: The appeal failed (by a majority). The … Continue reading Roberts v Parole Board: HL 7 Jul 2005
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 3 with regard to the first applicant ; No violation of Art. 3 with regard to the other applicants ; No violation of Art. 8 ; No violation of Art. 13 ; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award ; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedingsThe … Continue reading Lorse and Others v The Netherlands: ECHR 4 Feb 2003
ECHR Article 5-1 Lawful arrest or detention Continued imprisonment without review under ‘wholly punitive’ life sentence: inadmissible Facts – The applicants were serving mandatory life sentences for murder. Mr Lynch was convicted of murder in 1997 and given the sentence of life imprisonment that is mandatory in Irish law. His detention was reviewed on a … Continue reading Lynch And Whelan v Ireland (Dec): ECHR 8 Jul 2014
The applicants had each been given a life sentence, but having served the minimum term had been due to have the continued detention reviewed to establish whether or not continued detention was necessary for the protection of the pblic. It had not been, and each had claimed there was no basis for his continued detention, … Continue reading Faulkner, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and Another: SC 1 May 2013
The Commission challenged the compatibility of the NI law relating to banning nearly all abortions with Human Rights Law. It now challenged a decision that it did not have standing to bring the case.
Held: (Lady Hale, Lord Kerr and Lord Wilson . .
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (non exhaustion); Preliminary objection rejected (abuse of process); No violation of Art. 5-1; Violation of Art. 5-4; No violation of . .
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 5-1 with regard to the initial period; No violation of Art. 5-1 with regard to the subsequent period; No violation of Art. 5-3; Violation of Art. . .
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
