Click the case name for better results:

Dyson Limited v The Registrar of Trade Marks: ChD 15 May 2003

Applications for trade marks on behalf of the claimant had been rejected. Acquired distinctiveness was a significant issue, and the question of whether the appeal was a review or a rehearing was significant. In this appeal, the parties had given oral evidence, and the Registrar contended that any further appeal to the High court should … Continue reading Dyson Limited v The Registrar of Trade Marks: ChD 15 May 2003

Roberts And Roberts v The United Kingdom: ECHR 5 Jul 2011

(Admissibility) The claimants, members of the British Nation Party, had complained of defamation by other elements of the BNP as regards te circumstances of the theft of the proceeds of a meeting being stolen from their home. The claim had been dismissed as reportage of a politicalk event with Reynolds privilege: ‘libel litigation is not … Continue reading Roberts And Roberts v The United Kingdom: ECHR 5 Jul 2011

Kolb and Others v Austria: ECHR 17 Apr 2003

The applicants alleged, in particular, that the length of land consolidation proceedings involving their property exceeded the ‘reasonable time’ requirement of Article 6 of the Convention. The first applicant also complained about hearings in camera. They were farmers living in Stumm. On 7 July 1966 the Tirol Regional Government as the Agricultural Authority of First … Continue reading Kolb and Others v Austria: ECHR 17 Apr 2003

Huseyin Habip Taskin v Turkey: ECHR 1 Feb 2011

The applicant complained that he had been denied the assistance of a lawyer during his police custody and that his police statement which had been taken in the absence of a lawyer had been used in his conviction by the trial court. Judges: Francoise Tulkens, President Citations: 5289/06, [2011] ECHR 159 Links: Bailii Statutes: European … Continue reading Huseyin Habip Taskin v Turkey: ECHR 1 Feb 2011

MB, Re, Secretary of State for the Home Department v MB: Admn 12 Apr 2006

The applicant challenged the terms of a non-derogating control order. It was anticipated that unless prevented, he would fight against UK forces in Iraq. Held: The section allowed the Secretary of State to impose any necessary conditions, but subject to a system of supervision by the courts. The parties now disputed whether the Act gave … Continue reading MB, Re, Secretary of State for the Home Department v MB: Admn 12 Apr 2006

Tsfayo v The United Kingdom: ECHR 14 Nov 2006

The applicant challenged the prodecures for deciding her appeal against the council’s refusal to pay backdated housing benefits. She complained that the availability of judicial review of the decision was not adequate. Held: The system did not provide a fair system. The Board was not itself independent of the Council whose decision it looked at … Continue reading Tsfayo v The United Kingdom: ECHR 14 Nov 2006

In Re Swaptronics Ltd: ChD 24 Jul 1998

A party who was in contempt of court should not be debarred from continuing to take a proper part in a court action unless that contempt was serious enough seriously to interfere with the fair conduct of the trial. ‘The courts need powers of punishment with which to enforce their orders. The ones they have … Continue reading In Re Swaptronics Ltd: ChD 24 Jul 1998

McKenna v Her Majesty’s Advocate: ScHC 30 Dec 1999

The appellant was charged with murder. A witness had since died, and he objected to the introduction of his written statement, on the basis that this would infringe his right to a fair trial. The evidence was likely to be decisive. Held: The fairness of the trial had to be considered as a whole. There … Continue reading McKenna v Her Majesty’s Advocate: ScHC 30 Dec 1999

Stockholms Forsakrings- Och Skadestandsjuridik Ab v Sweden: ECHR 16 Sep 2003

Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion) ; Violation of P1-1 ; No violation of Art. 6-1 ; Violation of Art. 13 ; Pecuniary damage – financial award ; Costs and expenses partial awardThe claimant company alleged that its human rights had been violated in that it had been ordered to pay … Continue reading Stockholms Forsakrings- Och Skadestandsjuridik Ab v Sweden: ECHR 16 Sep 2003

Anagnostopoulos v Greece: ECHR 10 Feb 2005

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 6-1; Violation of Art. 13; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses (domestic proceedings) – claim rejected; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings. Citations: 37429/02, [2005] ECHR 95 Links: Worldlii, Bailii Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights 6.1 Jurisdiction: Human Rights Human … Continue reading Anagnostopoulos v Greece: ECHR 10 Feb 2005

Crowther v The United Kingdom: ECHR 1 Feb 2005

The applicant complained of the delay by the Customs and Excise in enforcing a confiscation order against him of four years. Held: The respondent had allowed almost four years to pass after the liability had been incurred without taking any steps to enforce the order. That deal did infringe the applicant’s human rights. The defendant … Continue reading Crowther v The United Kingdom: ECHR 1 Feb 2005

Andreadaki and Others v Greece: ECHR 10 Feb 2005

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 6-1 with regard to the length of the proceedings; Inadmissible under Art. 6-1 as regard to the fairness of the proceedings, and under P1-1; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses (domestic proceedings) – claim rejected; Costs and expenses (Convention proceedings) – claim rejected. … Continue reading Andreadaki and Others v Greece: ECHR 10 Feb 2005

Sukhorubchenko v Russia: ECHR 10 Feb 2005

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 6-1 with regard to access to a court; Not necessary to examine Art. 6-1 with regard to the length of the proceedings; Not necessary to examine Art. 13; No violation of P1-1; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award. Citations: 69315/01, [2005] … Continue reading Sukhorubchenko v Russia: ECHR 10 Feb 2005

P v BW (Children Cases: Hearings in Public): FD 2003

The applicant sought a joint residence order, and for a declaration that the rules preventing such hearings being in public breached the requirement for a public hearing. Held: Both FPR 1991 rule 4.16(7) and section 97 are compatible with the fair trial provisions of Article 61) of the European Convention for the Protection of Human … Continue reading P v BW (Children Cases: Hearings in Public): FD 2003

Szarapo v Poland: ECHR 23 May 2002

Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1; Non-pecuniary damage – financial awardThe parties had been involved in an application for a declaration of paternity and maintenance. They began in 1980. Poland became a convention signatory in 1993. The proceedings were concluded in 2000. Held: The court could only look at the time … Continue reading Szarapo v Poland: ECHR 23 May 2002

In re McHugh Southern Ltd (in Liquidation): ChD 12 Dec 2002

An order striking out a case for abuse by reason of the claimant’s delay should only be made where the delay had lead to a situation where it was no longer possible to secure a fair hearing. Where a fair trial remained possible, the court could use some other remedy to penalise a delaying claimant. … Continue reading In re McHugh Southern Ltd (in Liquidation): ChD 12 Dec 2002

Massey v United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Nov 2004

The claimant had been accused of indecent assault. The criminal proceedings continued for just under five years. Held: The case was not particularly complex, and the consequences for the claimant were severe. There was no complex forensic evidence, and the issues were in substance as to the credibility of three witnesses some many years after … Continue reading Massey v United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Nov 2004

King v United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Nov 2004

The claimant had been subject to tax penalty proceedings. They continued for more than 14 years. Held: The length of the proceedings exceeded the time properly to be allowed, and infringed his right to a fair trial. Though the taxpayer himself had contributed to the delay with unmeritorious appeals, the state’s delay was excessive. Citations: … Continue reading King v United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Nov 2004

B v The United Kingdom; P v The United Kingdom: ECHR 24 Apr 2001

The procedures in English law which provided for privacy for proceedings involving children did not in general infringe the human right to family life, nor the right to a public hearing. Where relatives more distant than immediate parties were affected, the rules allowed application for their admission to the proceedings, and leave could also be … Continue reading B v The United Kingdom; P v The United Kingdom: ECHR 24 Apr 2001

Grieves v The United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Dec 2003

Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1 ; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedingsThe claimant had been dismissed from the Royal Navy after a court martial. He complained that the tribunal did not have sufficient independence. Held: The claimant’s rights were infringed. Though there was facility to appoint a prosecutor … Continue reading Grieves v The United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Dec 2003

Cooper v The United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Dec 2003

Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction)The claimant had been dismissed from the RAF after a court martial. He complained that the tribunal was not independent, and that his trial was unfair. Held: The court rejected the submission that no court martial could act independently. There was sufficient separation between the various roles and the chain … Continue reading Cooper v The United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Dec 2003

Regina (on the Application of Dudson) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and the Lord Chief Justice: Admn 21 Nov 2003

The applicant had been sentenced to detention during Her Majesty’s Pleasure. He sought a judicial review of the Lord Chief Justice’s recommendation to the Home Secretary for the minimum term he was to serve. Held: In exercising this function, the LCJ was acting in a judicial capacity, and therefore his recommendation was not subject to … Continue reading Regina (on the Application of Dudson) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and the Lord Chief Justice: Admn 21 Nov 2003

Easterbrook v The United Kingdom: ECHR 12 Jun 2003

The prisoner was convicted of an armed robbery in which a policeman had been shot, and had been sentenced to life imprisonment. The judge set no tariff himself. The tariff was set by the Home Secretary, but only after some time. The discretionary life prisoner had been refused the right to make oral representations to … Continue reading Easterbrook v The United Kingdom: ECHR 12 Jun 2003

Barnette v Government of the United States of America; United States Government v Montgomery (No 2): CA 24 Mar 2003

The appellant sought to resist the registration here of a confiscation order made in the US. She argued it would be contrary to the interests of justice to register it, that the US procedure would be unlawful here under the Convention, the appeal having been held in her absence. Held: It could not be said … Continue reading Barnette v Government of the United States of America; United States Government v Montgomery (No 2): CA 24 Mar 2003

Mitchell and Holloway v The United Kingdom: ECHR 17 Dec 2002

The applicant had become involved in civil proceedings which extended over ten years. They complained of an infringement of their human rights through the delay. Held: The court had to take account of the complexity of the matter. This had been complex in fact and law, and one party had been obstructive. Nevertheless, some four … Continue reading Mitchell and Holloway v The United Kingdom: ECHR 17 Dec 2002

Regina v HM Advocate and The Advocate General for Scotland: PC 28 Nov 2002

(The High Court of Justiciary) The prosecution had accepted that the matter had been the subject of unreasonable delay, but wished to continue. The defendant sought a plea in bar, on the basis that continuing would infringe his rights. Held: Once it was accepted that the delay took the prosecution outside the defendant’s right to … Continue reading Regina v HM Advocate and The Advocate General for Scotland: PC 28 Nov 2002

P, C And S v The United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Jul 2002

The applicants challenged the way in which their newborn children had been removed by the state after birth. S had not had the opportunity of legal representation, after her lawyers had withdrawn. The removal of S’s child was challenged as disproportionate and a breach of the right to family life. Held: Given the importance of … Continue reading P, C And S v The United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Jul 2002

Davies v The United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Jul 2002

The applicant had been subject to applications for his disqualification from acting as a company director. The Secretary of State waited until the last day before issuing proceedings, and the proceedings were then delayed another three years pending the outcome of criminal proceedings against others. The government responded that the proceedings were complex, and the … Continue reading Davies v The United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Jul 2002

Carpenter v Secretary of State for the Home Department: ECJ 11 Jul 2002

The applicant had come to England on a six month visitor’s visa. She then married an English national, but her visa was not extended. Held: The husband had business interests and activities throughout the community. The deportation of the applicant would have the effect of removing her support for him and restrict his ability to … Continue reading Carpenter v Secretary of State for the Home Department: ECJ 11 Jul 2002

Matthews v Ministry of Defence: CA 29 May 2002

The Ministry appealed against a finding that the Act, which deprived the right of a Crown employee to sue for personal injuries, was an infringement of his human rights. Held: The restriction imposed by the section was not a procedural section, but a substantive one which delimited the rights and liabilities arising under civil law. … Continue reading Matthews v Ministry of Defence: CA 29 May 2002

Chapman v United Kingdom; similar: ECHR 18 Jan 2001

The question arose as to the refusal of planning permission and the service of an enforcement notice against Mrs Chapman who wished to place her caravan on a plot of land in the Green Belt. The refusal of planning permission and the enforcement notice were upheld by the inspector. Held: The needs of gypsies for … Continue reading Chapman v United Kingdom; similar: ECHR 18 Jan 2001

Frydlender v France: ECHR 27 Jun 2000

The reasonableness of the length of proceedings must be assessed in the light of the circumstances of the case and with reference to the criteria established by its case-law, particularly the complexity of the case, the conduct of the applicant and of the relevant authorities and what was at stake for the applicant in the … Continue reading Frydlender v France: ECHR 27 Jun 2000

Van Mechelen And Others v The Netherlands: ECHR 23 Apr 1997

A Dutch court had convicted the applicants of attempted manslaughter and robbery on the basis of statements made, before their trial, by anonymous police officers, none of whom gave evidence before the Regional Court or the investigating judge. The Court of Appeal referred the case to the investigating judge who arranged hearings in which he, … Continue reading Van Mechelen And Others v The Netherlands: ECHR 23 Apr 1997

Stubbings and Others v The United Kingdom: ECHR 22 Oct 1996

There was no human rights breach where the victims of sex abuse had been refused a right to sue for damages out of time. The question is whether and to what extent differences in otherwise similar situations justify a different treatment in law: ‘Limitation periods in personal injury cases are a common feature of the … Continue reading Stubbings and Others v The United Kingdom: ECHR 22 Oct 1996

Eastaway v The United Kingdom: ECHR 20 Jul 2004

The applicant had been proceeded against after the collapse of companies in which he was involved with very substantial debts. The proceedings had begun in July 1990, and lasted nearly nine years. Held: Where proceedings could be expected to have an adverse effect on the applicant’s reputation and ability to practice his profession, special diligence … Continue reading Eastaway v The United Kingdom: ECHR 20 Jul 2004

Benham v United Kingdom: ECHR 8 Feb 1995

Legal Aid was wrongfully refused where a tax or fine defaulter was liable to imprisonment, and the lack of a proper means enquiry, made imprisonment of poll tax defaulter unlawful. A poll tax defaulter had been wrongly committed to prison by magistrates. The question was whether or not they had acted in excess of jurisdiction. … Continue reading Benham v United Kingdom: ECHR 8 Feb 1995

Kaplan v United Kingdom: ECHR 14 Dec 1978

(Admissibility) The Secretary of State had, after preliminary procedures, served notices on an insurance company disallowing it from writing any new business, because its managing director the applicant, had been found not to be a fit and proper person to be a controller of the company. He had misstated the value of the company’s assets. … Continue reading Kaplan v United Kingdom: ECHR 14 Dec 1978

Goc v Turkey: ECHR 9 Nov 2000

The applicant had claimed compensation for unlawful detention and mistreatment during that detention; although the proceedings were civil in nature, they were governed by the code of criminal procedure. The applicant was not given an oral hearing before the first instance court which was responsible for establishing the facts and assessing the compensation; Turkey sought … Continue reading Goc v Turkey: ECHR 9 Nov 2000

In re Medicaments and Related Classes of Goods (No 4): CA 26 Jul 2001

The parties had expended very considerable sums preparing for a hearing. The hearing became abortive when it was questioned whether a member of the court had given the appearance of bias. The parties sought payment of their wasted costs from the Lord Chancellor, as the person responsible for providing the court, on the basis that … Continue reading In re Medicaments and Related Classes of Goods (No 4): CA 26 Jul 2001

Ganimet Taskin v Turkey: ECHR 4 Oct 2011

The applicant complained that the length of the proceedings had been incompatible with the ‘reasonable time’ requirement, laid down in Article 6.1 Judges: Dragoljub Popovic, President Citations: 17993/09, [2011] ECHR 1507 Links: Bailii Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights 6.1 Jurisdiction: Human Rights Human Rights Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.445010

Goldsmith and Another v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: QBD 7 Jun 2001

The applicants were stopped after bringing into the country 26 kilos of tobacco, without declaring it. The customs applied for an order condemning the tobacco. The applicants argued that the proceedings were, in effect, criminal proceedings, and that, therefore, the reversal of the burden of proof was a breach of their right to a fair … Continue reading Goldsmith and Another v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: QBD 7 Jun 2001

Lloyd v Bow Street Magistrates Court: Admn 8 Oct 2003

The defendant had been convicted and made subect to a confiscation order in 1996. A final order for enforcement was made in late 2002. The defendant said the delay in the enforcement proceedings was a breach of his right to a trial within a reasonable time. Held: The reasonable time guarantee afforded by Article 6.1 … Continue reading Lloyd v Bow Street Magistrates Court: Admn 8 Oct 2003

Lunari v Italy: ECHR 11 Jan 2001

Citations: 21463/93, [2001] ECHR 10, [2001] ECHR 10 Links: Worldlii, Bailii Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights 6.1 Jurisdiction: Human Rights Cited by: Cited – Pulcini v Italy ECHR 17-Apr-2003 Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of P1-1 ; Violation of Art. 6-1 ; Pecuniary damage – financial award ; Non-pecuniary damage – financial … Continue reading Lunari v Italy: ECHR 11 Jan 2001

Pressos Compania Naviera S A And Others v Belgium: ECHR 20 Nov 1995

When determining whether a claimant has possessions or property within the meaning of Article I the court may have regard to national law and will generally do so unless the national law is incompatible with the object and purpose of Article 1. Any interference with the enjoyment of property must be justifiable as being in … Continue reading Pressos Compania Naviera S A And Others v Belgium: ECHR 20 Nov 1995

Regina (U) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis; Regina (R) v Chief Constable of Durham Constabulary: Admn 29 Nov 2002

In each case the youth aged 15 had been given a warning after admitting a sexual assault, and a decision had been made not to prosecute. On accepting the warnings, they had then been required to place their names on the sex offenders register, but this had not been explained to them when asked about … Continue reading Regina (U) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis; Regina (R) v Chief Constable of Durham Constabulary: Admn 29 Nov 2002

Pelissier and Sassi v France: ECHR 25 Mar 1999

Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1+6-3-a; Violation of Art. 6-1+6-3-b; Violation of Art. 6-1; Pecuniary damage – financial award; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1999-II 25444/94, [1999] ECHR 17, (1999) … Continue reading Pelissier and Sassi v France: ECHR 25 Mar 1999

Robins v The United Kingdom: ECHR 23 Sep 1997

Over-long delay by court system in settling amount of costs constituted breach of human rights; order made in 1991, not settled till 1995 Times 24-Oct-1997, [1997] ECHR 72, 22410/93, (1997) 26 EHRR 527, [1997] ECHR 72 Worldlii, Bailii European Convention on Human Rights 6.1 Human Rights Cited by: Cited – Davies v The United Kingdom … Continue reading Robins v The United Kingdom: ECHR 23 Sep 1997

Morice v France: ECHR 23 Apr 2015

There had been a long-running dispute as to the manner of death of a French judge seconded to Djibouti. The applicant, acting for the widow had been prosecuted for his outspoken criticisms of the judge who had had conduct of the case, until being replaced. The applicant claimed that, before the Court of Cassation, his … Continue reading Morice v France: ECHR 23 Apr 2015

Trancikova v Slovakia: ECHR 13 Jan 2015

The applicant alleged, in particular, that the observations filed by the defendant in her court action in response to the appeal had not been communicated to her and that, in violation of her rights under Article 6.1 of the Convention, she had been denied a public hearing of that appeal. Josep Casadevall, P 17127/12 – … Continue reading Trancikova v Slovakia: ECHR 13 Jan 2015

Regina v Connor and another; Regina v Mirza: HL 22 Jan 2004

Extension of Inquiries into Jury Room Activities The defendants sought an enquiry as to events in the jury rooms on their trials. They said that the secrecy of a jury’s deliberations did not fit the human right to a fair trial. In one case, it was said that jurors believed that the defendant’s use of … Continue reading Regina v Connor and another; Regina v Mirza: HL 22 Jan 2004

Saunders v The United Kingdom: ECHR 17 Dec 1996

(Grand Chamber) The subsequent use against a defendant in a prosecution, of evidence which had been obtained under compulsion in company insolvency procedures was a convention breach of Art 6. Although not specifically mentioned in Article 6 of the Convention the right to silence and the right not to incriminate oneself are generally recognised international … Continue reading Saunders v The United Kingdom: ECHR 17 Dec 1996

AM v United Kingdom: ECHR 2 Dec 1992

The applicant complained that at his trial in 1988 for the murder of two British soldiers in Befast, the judge had allowed the cameramen upon whose film evidence he had been convicted to be hidden from the view of the defendants. The court considered the admissibility of the claim. Held: The case wa inadmissible: ‘The … Continue reading AM v United Kingdom: ECHR 2 Dec 1992

Steel and Morris v United Kingdom: ECHR 15 Feb 2005

The applicants had been sued in defamation by McDonalds. They had no resources, and English law precluded legal aid for such cases. The trial was the longest in English legal history. They complained that the non-availablility of legal aid infringed their right to a fair trial. Held: There had been an unacceptable inequality of arms. … Continue reading Steel and Morris v United Kingdom: ECHR 15 Feb 2005

G, Regina (on the Application of) v X School and Another: Admn 18 Mar 2009

The claimant was employed as a music assistant. He was accused of sexual misconduct. He complained that he had not been allowed legal representation at the disciplinary hearing. Held: Whilst it is standard practice for legal representation not to be allowed, where the misconduct alleged was sufficiently serious, his article 6.1 rights were engaged and … Continue reading G, Regina (on the Application of) v X School and Another: Admn 18 Mar 2009

Runa Begum v London Borough of Tower Hamlets (First Secretary of State intervening): HL 13 Feb 2003

The appellant challenged the procedure for reviewing a decision made as to the suitability of accomodation offered to her after the respondent had accepted her as being homeless. The procedure involved a review by an officer of the council, with an appeal to the County Court on a point of law. Held: The decision was … Continue reading Runa Begum v London Borough of Tower Hamlets (First Secretary of State intervening): HL 13 Feb 2003

B -v The United Kingdom; P v The United Kingdom: ECHR 24 Apr 2001

References: Times 15-May-2001, 36337/97, 35974/97, (2002) 34 EHRR 529, [2001] 2 FLR 261, [2001] ECHR 295, [1999] ECHR 179 Links: Bailii, Bailii Ratio The procedures in English law which provided for privacy for proceedings involving children did not in general infringe the human right to family life, nor the right to a public hearing. Where … Continue reading B -v The United Kingdom; P v The United Kingdom: ECHR 24 Apr 2001

Le Compte, Van Leuven And De Meyere v Belgium: ECHR 23 Jun 1981

Hudoc The Court was faced with a disciplinary sanction imposed on doctors which resulted in their suspension for periods between 6 weeks and 3 months: ‘Unlike certain other disciplinary sanctions that might have been imposed on the applicants (warning, censure and reprimand . .), the suspension of which they complained undoubtedly constituted a direct and … Continue reading Le Compte, Van Leuven And De Meyere v Belgium: ECHR 23 Jun 1981

O’Connor v Bar Standards Board: SC 6 Dec 2017

The claimant barrister complained of the manner of conduct of the disciplinary proceedings brought against her. She had been cleared of any breach of the Bar Code of Conduct, but her claim was then ruled out of time under section 7(5)(a), time having begun on the initial ruling against her. Held: The appeal succeeded. The … Continue reading O’Connor v Bar Standards Board: SC 6 Dec 2017

Hooper and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 18 Jun 2003

The appellants were widowers whose wives had died at a time when the benefits a widow would have received were denied to widowers. The legislation had since changed but they variously sought compensation for the unpaid sums. Held: The appeal succeeded. By 1995 discrimination as to pensions was no longer supportable. And those appellants pursuing … Continue reading Hooper and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 18 Jun 2003

Department for Work and Pensions v Courts: Admn 3 May 2006

The appellant challenged stays of proceedings by the respondent magistrates court for abuse of process infringing the defendants’ human right to a fair trial. The magistrates had fund that being faced with dismissal of a summary case through delay, the appellant had increased the charges adding allegations of dishonesty which had not been put to … Continue reading Department for Work and Pensions v Courts: Admn 3 May 2006

Rowe and Davis v The United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Feb 2000

(Grand Chamber) Complaint as to non-disclosure of prosecution evidence. Judges: Wildhaber P Citations: [2000] ECHR 91 Links: Bailii Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights 5 6.1 Citing: Conjoined Hearing – Jasper v The United Kingdom ECHR 16-Feb-2000 Grand Chamber – The defendants had been convicted after the prosecution had withheld evidence from them and from … Continue reading Rowe and Davis v The United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Feb 2000

Jarvis v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 1 Aug 2012

INCOME TAX – Penalty – Section 93A Taxes Management Act 1970 – late submission of partnership return – appeal submitted by a partner other than the ‘representative partner’ – whether Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear appeal – whether penalty invokes criminal head of Article 6.1 of European Convention on Human Rights – whether absence of … Continue reading Jarvis v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 1 Aug 2012

Fitt v United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Feb 2000

(Grand Chamber) Complaint as to non-disclosure of prosecution evidence. Judges: Wildhaber P Citations: 29777/96, [2000] ECHR 89, (2000) 30 EHRR 480, [2000] Po LR 10 Links: Bailii, Worldlii Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights 5 6.1 Jurisdiction: Human Rights Cited by: Conjoined Hearing – Rowe and Davis v The United Kingdom ECHR 16-Feb-2000 (Grand Chamber) … Continue reading Fitt v United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Feb 2000

Maguire, Re Application for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland): SC 21 Mar 2018

The appellant faced a criminal trial. He was granted legal aid for two counsel. He asked for two particular junior counsel, but the certificate required him to instruct leading counsel and a junior. He objected that this deprived him of the right to his chosen counsel. Held: The appeal failed. The purpose of a defendant’s … Continue reading Maguire, Re Application for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland): SC 21 Mar 2018

Dvorski v Croatia: ECHR 28 Nov 2013

Citations: 25703/11 – Chamber Judgment, [2013] ECHR 1205 Links: Bailii Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights Jurisdiction: Human Rights Cited by: Cited – Dvorski v Croatia ECHR 20-Oct-2015 Grand Chamber: ‘As the Court has already held in its previous judgments, the right set out in article 6.3(c) of the Convention is one element, among others, … Continue reading Dvorski v Croatia: ECHR 28 Nov 2013

Dvorski v Croatia: ECHR 20 Oct 2015

Grand Chamber: ‘As the Court has already held in its previous judgments, the right set out in article 6.3(c) of the Convention is one element, among others, of the concept of a fair trial in criminal proceedings contained in article 6.1 (see Imbrioscia v Switzerland (1994) 17 EHRR 441, 24 November 1993, paras 36 and … Continue reading Dvorski v Croatia: ECHR 20 Oct 2015

A and Others v The United Kingdom: ECHR 21 Jan 2008

The court addressed the extent to which the admission of closed material was compatible with the fair hearing requirements of article 5.4, challenging lawfulness of detention, which imported the same rights as article 6.1 in its criminal aspect. The commission had made a declaration on incompatibility. Held: Non-disclosure of evidence could not properly go so … Continue reading A and Others v The United Kingdom: ECHR 21 Jan 2008

Zlinsat, Spol. SRO v Bulgaria: ECHR 15 Jun 2006

The Sofia Public Prosecutor’s Office had ordered the suspension of the performance of a privatisation contract relating to an hotel. The office had acted under its criminal jurisdiction and had also brought a civil action. There had been no finding of guilt: when it ordered the suspension, the Public Prosecutor’s Office had stated that ‘(the) … Continue reading Zlinsat, Spol. SRO v Bulgaria: ECHR 15 Jun 2006

Rabone and Another v Pennine Care NHS Trust: CA 21 Jun 2010

The claimant’s daughter had committed suicide after being given home leave on a secure ward by the respondent mental hospital. A claim in negligence had been settled, but the parents now appealed refusal of their claim that the hospital had failed in its article 2 duty to respect her right to life. Held: The decision … Continue reading Rabone and Another v Pennine Care NHS Trust: CA 21 Jun 2010

Ambrose v Harris, Procurator Fiscal, Oban, etc: SC 6 Oct 2011

(Scotland) The appellant had variously been convicted in reliance on evidence gathered at different stages before arrest, but in each case without being informed of any right to see a solicitor. The court was asked, as a devolution issue, at what point the duty to allow access to a solicitor arose, and what use might … Continue reading Ambrose v Harris, Procurator Fiscal, Oban, etc: SC 6 Oct 2011

Zaichenko v Russia: ECHR 18 Feb 2010

(First Section) The claimant complaned that he had not been allowed access to a lawyer when being questioned by police when he was not under arrest. He had been stopped driving home from work and his car inspected by the police after reports of workers stealing diesel from their service vehicles. Two cans of diesel … Continue reading Zaichenko v Russia: ECHR 18 Feb 2010

Poshteh v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea: SC 10 May 2017

The appellant, applying for housing as a homeless person, had rejected the final property offered on the basis that its resemblance to the conditions of incarceration in Iran, from which she had fled, would continue and indeed the mental difficulties which afflicted her following that incarceration. She now appealed from rejection of that claim by … Continue reading Poshteh v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea: SC 10 May 2017

Fazia Ali v The United Kingdom: ECHR 20 Oct 2015

The Court considered the duties imposed on housing authorities under Part VII of the 1996 Act. Held: Article 6.1 did apply, but in any event the procedure applied under the Act conformed to its requirements. Judges: Guido Raimondi, P Citations: 40378/10 (Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) : Court (Fourth Section)), [2015] ECHR 924, [2015] HLR … Continue reading Fazia Ali v The United Kingdom: ECHR 20 Oct 2015

Hirst v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Admn 22 Mar 2002

The applicant, a prisoner challenged the uniform ban on contact by prisoners with the media by telephone, arguing that it infringed his Article 10 rights. Held: Restricting telephone contact with the media was not part of imprisonment. A democratic society need not seek to prevent prisoners from expressing their views directly to the media about … Continue reading Hirst v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Admn 22 Mar 2002

Regina (Smith) v Parole Board (No 2): CA 31 Jul 2003

The applicant having been released on licence had his licence revoked. The decision had been made at a hearing which considered evidence on paper only, which he said was unfair. Held: The case law had maintained a proper distinction between the determination of a criminal charge and otherwise. The first required an oral hearing for … Continue reading Regina (Smith) v Parole Board (No 2): CA 31 Jul 2003

Secretary of State for the Home Department v AF AN and AE (No 3): HL 10 Jun 2009

The applicants complained that they had been made subject to non-derogating control orders as suspected terrorists, but that the failure to inform them of the allegations or evidence against them was unfair and infringed their human rights. The material was withheld in the interests of national security. Held: The failure to supply the defendants with … Continue reading Secretary of State for the Home Department v AF AN and AE (No 3): HL 10 Jun 2009

Fonseca Carreira v Portugal: ECHR 14 Jun 2001

‘The Court notes that the Convention institutions have consistently taken the view that Article 6.1 does not apply to proceedings for interim relief. The purpose of such proceedings is to deal with a temporary state of affairs pending the outcome of the main proceedings; consequently they do not result in a determination of civil rights … Continue reading Fonseca Carreira v Portugal: ECHR 14 Jun 2001

Regina v Ashton, Lyons and Webber: CACD 6 Dec 2002

The appellants had appealed sentences for conspiracy to murder. There had been an inordinate delay between leave to appeal having been granted, and the appeal being heard. Held: The appellants’ rights had been infringed by the delay, and they had a right to redress. That could be satisfied by a reduction in the sentences of … Continue reading Regina v Ashton, Lyons and Webber: CACD 6 Dec 2002

London Borough of Tower Hamlets v Runa Begum: CA 6 Mar 2002

The applicant had applied for rehousing as a homeless person. She was offered interim accommodation but refused it. Her case was reviewed, and her reasons rejected. She claimed the procedure was unfair, in that the authority was looking at decisions on disputed facts, and reviewing its own decisions on those facts. It was not acting … Continue reading London Borough of Tower Hamlets v Runa Begum: CA 6 Mar 2002