Each defendant was charged under a statute which provided a defence if they could prove a certain element. They complained that this was a breach of their human rights. The complaint was rejected. It would be wrong to impose a burden of proof on a defendant as regards a main element of a crime, but … Continue reading Regina v Lambert; Regina v Ali; Regina v Jordan: CACD 14 Sep 2000
References: [2001] EMLR 777, [2000] 3 HKLRD 418, [2000] HKCFA 35 Links: hklii Coram: Chief Justice Li, Mr Justice Bokhary PJ, Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ, Sir Denys Roberts NPJ and Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead NPJ (Court of Final Appeal of Hong Kong) For the purposes of the defence to defamation of fair comment: ‘The comment … Continue reading Tse Wai Chun Paul v Albert Cheng; 13 Nov 2000
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
Citations: [2008] EWCA Crim 1161 Statutes: Terrorism Act 2000 57 58 118 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Regina v G; Regina v J HL 4-Mar-2009 G was to stand trial for possession of articles useful for terrorism. Whilst in prison, he collected and created diagrams and information and prepared plans to bomb … Continue reading J v Regina: CACD 2008
The Court considered the nature of the documents which fall within the section and, secondly, the scope of the defence of reasonable excuse under section 58(3). Held: ‘A document or record will only fall within section 58 if it is of a kind that is likely to provide practical assistance to a person committing or … Continue reading K v Regina: CACD 13 Feb 2008
The defendants, accused of offences under the 2000 Act, appealed an interim finding that documents stored on computers could amount to ‘articles’ within the Act. They said that the existence of sections 57 and 58 suggested two distinct regimes, one for documents, and one for articles. Held: The district judge should have followed Rowe. The … Continue reading M, Regina v; Regina v Z; Regina v I; Regina v R; Regina v B (No 2): CACD 27 Apr 2007
The defendants appealed a ruling by the recorder that electronic storage devices were ‘articles’ within s57. S58 dealt with documents, and section 57 with articles. Held: Hooper LJ said: ‘There is no practical difference between a book which a person can read (perhaps with help) and a CD which can be read by inserting it … Continue reading M and Others, Regina v: CACD 7 Feb 2007
Application for leave to appeal against a conviction of six offences of possession of an article for a purpose connected with the commission, preparation or instigation of an act of terrorism. Latham VP CACD LJ, Gross Lloyd Jones JJ [2008] EWCA Crim 2829 Bailii Terrorism Act 2000 57 England and Wales Crime Updated: 27 January … Continue reading Altimimi, Regina v: CACD 6 Nov 2008
The defendants appealed against their convictions for possessing articles for a terrorist purpose. Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers CJ [2008] EWCA Crim 184, [2008] 2 WLR 1013, [2008] QB 810, [2008] 2 Cr App R 8, [2008] 4 All ER 46 Bailii Terrorism Act 2000 57 England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Regina v … Continue reading Zafar and others v Regina: CACD 13 Feb 2008
The defendant had been convicted of possessing articles for terrorist purposes, namely a notebook with notes setting out how to construct a mortar bomb in his handwriting. There was also a coded list of potential targets. Held: The decision in R v M ‘that ‘articles’ within the meaning of section 57 cannot extend to documents … Continue reading Rowe v Regina: CACD 15 Mar 2007
G was to stand trial for possession of articles useful for terrorism. Whilst in prison, he collected and created diagrams and information and prepared plans to bomb a local army centre. When arrested he said he had done so to upset the prison officers. He suffered paranoid schizophrenia. It had been held that his mental … Continue reading Regina v G; Regina v J: HL 4 Mar 2009
The defendant sought to defend the claim for defamation by claiming fair comment. The claimant said that the relevant facts were not known to the defendant at the time of the publication. Held: To claim facts in aid of a defence of fair comment, it would make no sense if those facts were not known … Continue reading Lowe v Associated Newspapers Ltd: QBD 28 Feb 2006
The defendant appealed against his conviction for conveying ‘List A’ articles into prison. He said that the proceedings had been a nullity for failure to comply with the requirements of Schedule 3 of the 1998 Act. He had not been notified of the possibility of making representations. Held: The appeal failed. The definition of terrorism … Continue reading Gul (H) v Regina: CACD 31 Jul 2012
The claimant alleged complicity by the defendant, (now former) Foreign Secretary, in his mistreatment by the US while held in Libya. He also alleged involvement in his unlawful abduction and removal to Libya, from which had had fled for political persecution. The defendants now appealed from rejection of the defendants’ claim to state immunity and … Continue reading Belhaj and Another v Straw and Others: SC 17 Jan 2017
Grand Chamber – The first applicant said he had been injured by a shot fired by a British soldier who had been carried for two miles into the Republic of Ireland, clinging to the applicant’s vehicle following an incident at a checkpoint. Held: Rules granting the State immunities, did not infringe the applicants’ right to … Continue reading McElhinney v Ireland; Al-Adsani v United Kingdom; Fogarty v United Kingdom: ECHR 21 Nov 2001
Evidence from 3rd Party Torture Inadmissible The applicants had been detained following the issue of certificates issued by the respondent that they posed a terrorist threat. They challenged the decisions of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission saying that evidence underlying the decisions had probably been obtained by torture committed by foreign powers, and should not … Continue reading A and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department (No 2): HL 8 Dec 2005
An Egyptian national, had lived here since 1994. He challenged a decision by the Secretary of State,as a member of the committee of the United Nations Security Council, known as the Resolution 1267 Committee or Sanctions Committee. The committee maintained a list of persons and entities subject to the asset freeze imposed on persons ‘associated … Continue reading Youssef v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs: SC 27 Jan 2016
The defendants sought to appeal against their sentences for withholding information about terrorism. Held: The factor determing the sentence was not principally the extent of the information which might have been provided, but rather the seriousness of the terrorist activity. Time which had been spent awaiting trial subject to a curfew enforced by means of … Continue reading Sherif and Others, Regina v: CACD 21 Nov 2008
The newspaper appealed an award of damages for defamation after its theatre critic’s review of an opera written by the claimant. The author said the article made him appear to sympathise with terrorism. Held: The appeal succeeded. Keene LJ said: ‘It is unusual for this court to overturn a judge who has ruled that a … Continue reading Associated Newspapers Ltd v Burstein: CA 22 Jun 2007
The claimant sought increased maternity pay. Before beginning her maternity leave she had been awarded a pay increase, but it was not backdated so as to affect the period upon which the calculation of her average pay was based. The court made a detailed comparison of the regimes for protection under the Employment Rights Act … Continue reading Alabaster v Barclays Bank Plc and Another: CA 3 May 2005
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); Violation of Art. 3; Violation of Art. 6-1; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses award – Convention proceedingsThe claimant said that he had been severely beaten whilst detained in police custody for interview. Held: ‘Article 3 enshrines one of the most fundamental values … Continue reading Selmouni v France: ECHR 28 Jul 1999
The court considered the required basis for a reasonable suspicion to found an arrest without a warrant: ‘The ‘reasonableness’ of the suspicion on which an arrest must be based forms an essential part of the safeguard against arbitrary arrest and detention which is laid down in Article 5(1)(c). The court agrees with the Commission and … Continue reading Fox, Campbell and Hartley v The United Kingdom: ECHR 30 Aug 1990
The respondent appealed against a finding that the provision which made a loan agreement completely invalid for lack of compliance with the 1974 Act was itself invalid under the Human Rights Act since it deprived the respondent lender of its property rights. It was also argued that it was not possible to make a declaration … Continue reading Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2): HL 10 Jul 2003
A successful plaintiff who had not been shown to have behaved improperly or unreasonably was not to have his costs reduced or be ordered to pay any part of his opponents costs for having pursued some unsuccessful points. Nourse LJ said that ‘(i) Costs are in the discretion of the court. (ii) They should follow … Continue reading Re Elgindata Ltd (2): CA 15 Jul 1992
The claimants objected to orders made freezing their assets under the 2006 Order, after being included in the Consolidated List of suspected members of terrorist organisations. Held: The orders could not stand. Such orders were made by the executive without parliamentary scrutiny by the use of Orders in Council. Statutory provision for counter-terrorism was in … Continue reading HM Treasury v Ahmed and Others: SC 27 Jan 2010
The defendant faced extradition to the USA on charges of the obstruction of justice. He challenged the extradition on the basis that it would interfere with his article 8 rights to family life, given that the offence was merely ancillary, the result would be disproportionate. The court was asked whether in order to found such … Continue reading Norris v Government of United States of America: SC 24 Feb 2010
Appellate Roles – Human Rights – Families Split The House considered the decision making role of immigration appellate authorities when deciding appeals on Human Rights grounds, against refusal of leave to enter or remain, under section 65. In each case the asylum applicant had had his own request refused but that of his family had … Continue reading Huang v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 21 Mar 2007
The applicant had previously received licences to fish for Patagonian Toothfish off South Georgia. The defendant had instructed the issuer of the licence in such a way that it was not renewed. It now had to establish that its article 1 rights had been infringed in order to claim damages. Held: The appeal succeeded, and … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs ex parte Quark Fishing Limited: HL 13 Oct 2005
Same Sex Partner Entitled to tenancy Succession The protected tenant had died. His same-sex partner sought a statutory inheritance of the tenancy. Held: His appeal succeeded. The Fitzpatrick case referred to the position before the 1998 Act: ‘Discriminatory law undermines the rule of law because it is the antithesis of fairness. It brings the law … Continue reading Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza: HL 21 Jun 2004
The applicant, a Pakistani national had entered the UK to act as a Muslim priest. The Home Secretary was satisfied that he was associated with a Muslim terrorist organisation, and refused indefinite leave to remain. The Home Secretary provided both open and closed statements to the tribunal. The open statement accepted that the organisation was … Continue reading Secretary of State for the Home Department v Rehman: HL 11 Oct 2001
Restraint on Interference with Burden of Proof The defendant had been convicted for possessing drugs found on him in a bag when he was arrested. He denied knowing of them. He was convicted having failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that he had not known of the drugs. The case was heard before … Continue reading Regina v Lambert: HL 5 Jul 2001
The applicants had been imprisoned and held without trial, being suspected of international terrorism. No criminal charges were intended to be brought. They were foreigners and free to return home if they wished, but feared for their lives if they did. A British subject, who was suspected in the exact same way, and there were … Continue reading A v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 16 Dec 2004
The defendant had faced trial on terrorist charges. He claimed that delay and the very substantial adverse publicity had made his fair trial impossible, and that it was not an offence for a foreign national to solicit murders to be carried out abroad. Held: The appeal failed. Murder is singled out as an offence even … Continue reading Regina v Abu Hamza: CACD 28 Nov 2006
The applicants alleged a violation of Article 6-1 and 3 (c) in that they had been interviewed by the police without access to a lawyer and that the evidence obtained from those interviews was used at their respective trials. Held: As to the first three claimants: ‘the applicants, not the prosecution, brought the safety interview … Continue reading Ibrahim And Others v The United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Dec 2014
The defendant appealed against his conviction under the 2000 Act for failing to disclose the key used to encrypt a computer file. He was subject to a control order as a suspected terrorist. As the police raided his house, they found the key had been half entered. He said that the requirement to disclose the … Continue reading Regina v S and A: CACD 9 Oct 2008
Arrested Person must be told basis of the Arrest Police officers appealed against a finding of false imprisonment. The plaintiff had been arrested under the 1921 Act, but this provided no power of arrest (which the appellant knew). The officers might lawfully have arrested the plaintiff for the felony of stealing a bale of cloth, … Continue reading Christie v Leachinsky: HL 25 Mar 1947
Possessing information likely to be useful to terrorism . .
The court was asked whether the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court, exercisable by way of judicial review, extends to such decisions of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) and the Upper Tribunal (UT) as are not amenable to any . .
The defendants sought leave to appeal against their convictions for conspiracy to murder after involvement in a plot to explode several bombs on the London Transport system. They said that it had not been their intention to explode the devices.
Parties challenged the rule allowing the respondent to deny the right to enter or remain here to non EU citizens marrying a person settled and present here where either party was under the age of 21. The aim of the rule was to deter forced . .
Renewed application for leave to appeal from convictions of offences preparatory to terrorism. . .
The two prisoners, serving life sentences for murder, had had their appeals rejected. They continued to protest innocence, and sought to bring their campaigns to public attention through the press, having oral interviews with journalists without . .
