The applicant said that the fact that she had not been allowed to attend a bail hearing in person had infringed her article 5-3, 5-4, and 6 rights. She had been arrested and held in custody. The magistrates granted her bail, but she was held in custody after the prosecution immediately appealed. She had been … Continue reading Allen v The United Kingdom: ECHR 30 Mar 2010
Statement of facts Citations: 18837/06, [2006] ECHR 1165 Links: Bailii Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights Jurisdiction: Human Rights Cited by: Statement of facts – Allen v The United Kingdom ECHR 30-Mar-2010 The applicant said that the fact that she had not been allowed to attend a bail hearing in person had infringed her article … Continue reading Allen v The United Kingdom: ECHR 2 May 2006
ECHR Judgment (Just Satisfaction) – Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient. Citations: [1989] ECHR 9, 11234/84, 11209/84, 11266/84 Links: Worldlii, Bailii Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights Jurisdiction: Human Rights Citing: See Also – Brogan and Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 29-Nov-1988 ECHR Judgment (Merits) – Violation of Art. 5-3; Violation of Art. … Continue reading Brogan and Others v United Kingdom (Article 50): ECHR 30 May 1989
ECHR Judgment (Merits) – Violation of Art. 5-3; Violation of Art. 5-5; No violation of Art. 5-1; No violation of Art. 5-4; Not necessary to examine Art. 13; Just satisfaction reserved.The four applicants were arrested and detained under prevention of terrorism legislation on suspicion of being concerned in the commission, preparation or instigation of acts … Continue reading Brogan and Others v The United Kingdom: ECHR 29 Nov 1988
The claimant said that his continued detention after the custody time limits had expired was an infringement of his human rights. He faced continued detention having been refused bail because of his arrest on a grave charge, having a previous conviction for another grave offence. Held: The appeal was dismissed. Insofar as the the word … Continue reading O v Crown Court at Harrow: HL 26 Jul 2006
ECHR Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objections dismissed (victim, non-exhaustion of domestic remedies) ; Violation of Art. 5-3 ; Violation of Art. 5-4 ; Violation of Art. 5-5 ; No separate issue under Art. 13 ; No violation of Art. 6-1 ; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected ; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation … Continue reading Pavletic v Slovakia: ECHR 22 Jun 2004
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 5-3; Violation of Art. 5-4; Violation of Art. 8; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses awardA warrant must be validated by an independent judicial authority. Citations: [2000] ECHR 359, 27915/95, [2000] ECHR 360, [2000] 33 EHRR 1137 Links: Worldlii, Bailii Statutes: European … Continue reading Niedbala v Poland: ECHR 4 Jul 2000
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
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
(Grand Chamber) The applicant said that whilst a prisoner he had been banned from voting. The UK operated with minimal exceptions, a blanket ban on prisoners voting. Held: Voting is a right not a privilege. It was a right central in a democratic society. Though the right is not absolute, any limitation had to be … Continue reading Hirst v United Kingdom (2): ECHR 6 Oct 2005
ECHR Grand Chamber – Article 5-1 Lawful arrest or detention Internment in Iraq under Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions: no violation Article 1 Jurisdiction of states Responsibility of states Territorial jurisdiction in relation to detention of Iraqi national by coalition of armed forces in Iraq Facts – In March 2003 a coalition of armed forces … Continue reading Hassan v The United Kingdom (LS): ECHR 16 Sep 2014
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 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) Violation of Art. 5-3; Violation of Art. 5-4; Violation of Art. 6-1; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention . .
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) No violation of Art. 5-3; Violation of Art. 5-4; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – . .
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); Preliminary objection rejected (victim); Violation of Art. 5-3; Violation of Art. 5-4; Non-pecuniary damage – . .
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 5-3; Violation of Art. 5-4; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention . .
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. . .
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) No violation of Art. 5-1; Violation of Art. 5-3; Violation of Art. 5-4; Preliminary objection joined to merits (non-exhaustion); Preliminary objection rejected . .
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
