Grand Chamber – The defendants had been convicted after the prosecution had withheld evidence from them and from the judge under public interest immunity certificates. They complained that they had not had fair trials. Held: The right was breached insofar as the prosecution had themselves sought to make that assessment without judicial involvement. Disclosure at … Continue reading Jasper v The United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Feb 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
The defendants were accused of assisting a person to evade a control order. On arrest their computers had been seized, and they now sought an order on an interim appeal to discharge the case under the 2000 Act of not providing passwords to encrypted material. They said that the Act required them to incriminate themselves. … Continue reading Regina v S(F) and A(S): CACD 29 Jul 2008
Appeal by defendant in terrorist trial against ruling at preparatory hearing that he had no reasonable excuse defence. Citations: [2008] EWCA Crim 922 Links: Bailii Statutes: Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996, Terrorism Act 2000 58, Terrorism Act 2006 51 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Appeal from – Regina v G; Regina v J … Continue reading G v Regina: CACD 29 Apr 2008
Application for judicial review of refusal to hear bail application in public. The bail application before the magistrates had been held in public, but not that to the crown court, as was normal practice. The issue on such an application is not the merits of the refusal of bail, but the process by which the … Continue reading Malik v Central Criminal Court and Another: Admn 27 Jun 2006
Application for permission to appeal against two preparatory rulings. Held: Refused. Sharp LJ, Irwin, William Davies JJ [2014] EWCA Crim 2650 Bailii Terrorism Act 2006 2(1)(a) 2(c)(d), Terrorism Act 2000 58(1)(b) England and Wales Criminal Practice Updated: 24 December 2021; Ref: scu.539990
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
Possessing information likely to be useful to terrorism . .
Renewed application for leave to appeal from convictions of offences preparatory to terrorism. . .
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 claimant alleged that his detention by the police and the removal from him of encrypted computer storage devices purporting to use powers under the 2000 Act. He and his journalist partner had received and published materials said to be of security data received from the US reating to British security services. He now sought … Continue reading Miranda v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Others: Admn 19 Feb 2014
The Secretary of State wished to deport the applicant on the basis of his suspected involvement in acts of terrorism. An order for his deportation had been revoked by the respondent, but he had remained on very stringent bail conditions, since 2007. Held: The case failed on the article 6 issue because (i) the decision … Continue reading BB, Regina (on The Application of) v Special Immigration Appeals Commission and Another: CA 19 Nov 2012
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 claimant, an Iraqi national, had been about to be deported when he was re-arrested for Terrorism offences for which he was acquitted. He was then made subject to a non-derogating control order. He now challenged the renewal of that order, even under less stringent terms. Held: The restrictions imposed fell just within the boundary … Continue reading Secretary of State for the Home Department v AH: Admn 9 May 2008
(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
(Admissibility and Summary) Citations: [2009] ECHR 755, 4158/05 Links: Bailii Statutes: Terrorism Act 2000 44, European Convention on Human Rights 5 8 10 Jurisdiction: Human Rights Citing: At First Instance – Gillan and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis and Another Admn 31-Oct-2003 The applicants challenged by … Continue reading Gillan and Quinton v The United Kingdom: ECHR 12 May 2009
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
The Home Secretary had issued directives to the BBC and IBA prohibiting the broadcasting of speech by representatives of proscribed terrorist organisations. The applicant journalists challenged the legality of the directives on the ground that they were incompatible with the ECHR, and also on the ground that they were disproportionate in going beyond the established … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Brind: HL 7 Feb 1991
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 court set the questions to be answered later in response to the complaint as to the use of stop and search powers by the British police. Citations: 4158/05, [2008] ECHR 521 Links: Bailii Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights 5 8 10, Terrorism Act 2000 44 Jurisdiction: Human Rights Citing: At First Instance – … Continue reading Gillan and Quinton v The United Kingdom: ECHR 10 Jun 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 defendant had had responsibility to investigate and if necessary prosecute a company suspected of serious offences of bribery and corruption in the conduct of contract negotiations. The investigation had been stopped, alledgedly at the instigation of the government of Saudi Arabia, with a threat of ceasing co-operation in security arrangements. Held: The rule of … Continue reading Corner House Research and Campaign Against Arms Trade, Regina (on the Application of) v Director of the Serious Fraud Office and Another: Admn 10 Apr 2008
The applicant said that his human rights had been infringed under laws which required him to apply to the high court for bail rather than to a magistrate, necessitating a further four day wait before his application for bail was considered. He had been remanded after admitting an armed robbery, though the police had not … Continue reading McKay v The United Kingdom: ECHR 3 Oct 2006
The claimants had each been detained without trial for more than two years, being held as suspected terrorists. They were free leave to return to their own countries, but they feared for their lives if returned. They complained that the evidence used to justify their detention was derived from practices involving torture by the US … Continue reading A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, Mahmoud Abu Rideh Jamal Ajouaou v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 11 Aug 2004
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 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
The court considered the award of costs in a licensing case. Roch J said: ‘There can be no doubt that in civil proceedings between litigants, be it in the High Court or county court, the principle is that costs follow the event. The winning party obtains an order for costs against the losing party unless … Continue reading Regina v Totnes Licensing Justices, ex parte Chief Constable of Devon and Cornwall: QBD 28 May 1990
Power to call in is administrative in nature The powers of the Secretary of State to call in a planning application for his decision, and certain other planning powers, were essentially an administrative power, and not a judicial one, and therefore it was not a breach of the applicants’ rights to a fair hearing before … Continue reading Regina (Holding and Barnes plc) v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and the Regions; Regina (Alconbury Developments Ltd and Others) v Same and Others: HL 9 May 2001
The appellant challenged his extradition saying that the European Arrest Warrant under which he was held wrongly said that he was convicted, whilst he said he was wanted for trial. He had been tried in his absence, and the judgment and sentence were not under Italian law either final or enforceable until the appeal process … Continue reading Caldarelli v Court of Naples: HL 30 Jul 2008
The claimant had been stopped at Heathrow by the defendant’s officers, and an encrypted data device had been taken from him using powers derived from the 2000 Act. The device was thought to contain material taken from the US NSA security service. He said that the use of such powers was excessive. Lord Dyson MR, … Continue reading Miranda, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Others: CA 19 Jan 2016
The appellant convicted of a racially-aggravated vicious murder. Since conviction he had spent almost five years in segregation from other prisoners. The appellant now alleged that some very substantial periods of segregation had been in breach of the prison rules and of his Human Rights. Time limits for authorisation had not been complied with. Held: … Continue reading Shahid v Scottish Ministers (Scotland): SC 14 Oct 2015
The claimants had been stopped by the police using powers in the 2000 Act. They were going to a demonstration outside an arms convention. There was no reason given for any suspicion that the searches were needed. Held: The powers given to the police were too wide, provided inadequate protection against abuse, and violated the … Continue reading Gillan and Quinton v The United Kingdom: ECHR 12 Jan 2010
The bank challenged measures taken by HM Treasury to restrict access to the United Kingdom’s financial markets by a major Iranian commercial bank, Bank Mellat, on the account of its alleged connection with Iran’s nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programmes. The bank sought to have the direction given under section 7 of the 2008 Act. … Continue reading Bank Mellat v Her Majesty’s Treasury (No 2): SC 19 Jun 2013
The claimant sought damages here for a road traffic accident which had occurred in Australia. The defendant was working in England. The defendant argued that the law of New South Wales applied. Held: The general rule in section 11 was not to be displaced. Roerig implied a bright line between matters of assessment and heads … Continue reading Harding v Wealands: CA 17 Dec 2004
ECJ Judgment – Prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering and terrorist financing – Directive 2005/60/EC – Article 22(2) – Decision 2000/642/JHA – Requirement to report suspicious financial transactions applicable to credit institutions – Institution operating under the rules on the freedom to provide services – Identification of … Continue reading Jyske Bank Gibraltar Ltd v Administracion Del Estado: ECJ 25 Apr 2013
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
Local Council may not Sue in Defamation Local Authorities must be open to criticism as political and administrative bodies, and so cannot be allowed to sue in defamation. Such a right would operate as ‘a chill factor’ on free speech. Freedom of speech was the underlying value which supported the decision to lay down the … Continue reading Derbyshire County Council v Times Newspapers Ltd and Others: HL 18 Feb 1993
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
(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
The defendants had been convicted on guilty pleas of offences under the 2006 Act. Dart had been sentenced to a six year term and a five year extended sentence. Other received shorter and longer sentences as appropriate. They now applied for leave to appeal against sentence. Held: Leave was refused for three defendants, but given … Continue reading Dart and Others v Regina: CACD 31 Oct 2014
The claimant had been convicted of murder and his appeal had failed. He now sought disclosure of the forensic material held by the police to his own legal team. Held: Permission to apply for review was granted, but the claim failed. ‘It is necessary to show something that materially may cast doubt upon the safety … Continue reading Nunn v Suffolk Constabulary and Another: Admn 4 May 2012
The appellant had sought judicial review of the decision to extend the warrant for his detention. On an application to extend the warrant of detention, the judge had excluded the appellant and his solicitor from the hearing for about 10 minutes to consider closed information and, when the hearing resumed, they were not informed of … Continue reading Ward v Police Service of Northern Ireland: HL 21 Nov 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
Exercise of Ministerial Discretion The Minister had power to direct an investigation in respect of any complaint as to the operation of any marketing scheme for agricultural produce. Milk producers complained about the price paid by the milk marketing board for their milk when compared with prices paid to producers in other regions. The Minister … Continue reading Padfield v Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food: HL 14 Feb 1968
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 . .
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.
The court considered a challenge to the rules governing ‘out of country’ appeals against immigration decisions. They had in each case convictions leading to prison terms for serious drugs related offences.
Held: The appeals were allowed, and . .
The claimant pursued Employment Tribunal proceedings against the Immigration Service when his security clearance was withdrawn. The Tribunal allowed the respondent to use a closed material procedure under which it was provided with evidence unseen . .
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 . .
