The applicant complained that he had been arrested and detained by anti-terrorist police. At his trial evidence of his statement was challenged on the basis that it had been extracted from him under duress and that he had not had access to a lawyer. Citations: 36391/02, [2007] ECHR 332 Links: Bailii Statutes: European Convention on … Continue reading Salduz v Turkey: ECHR 26 Apr 2007
Civil recovery orders had been made against the applicant. He had been accused and acquitted of drug trafficking allegations in Europe, but the judge had been persuaded that he had no proper explanation for the accumulation of his wealth, and had rejected his evidence as unreliable. Held: The defendant’s appeal failed. The making of an … Continue reading Gale and Another v Serious Organised Crime Agency: SC 26 Oct 2011
Statement without lawyer access was inadmissible The accused complained that he had been convicted for assault and breach of the peace on the basis of a statement made by him during an interview with the police where, under the 1995 Act, he had been denied access to a lawyer. Held: The section must be read … Continue reading Cadder v Her Majesty’s Advocate: SC 26 Oct 2010
ECHR (Commission) Article 6, paragraph I of the Convention(a) A virulent press campaign can, in certain circumstances, adversely affect the fairness of a trial and involve the State’s responsibility, particularly if it is sparked off bv one of the State’s organs.(b) Alleged failure by the public prosecutor’s office to include in the file and communicate … Continue reading Jespers v Belgium: ECHR 1981
The Lord Advocate appealed against three decisions as to the use to be made of interviews where the detainees had not been given access to lawyers. In each case the prosecutor now appealed after their convictions had been overturned in the light of the decision in Cadder. Held: (Lord Kerr dissenting) The prosecutor’s appeals failed. … Continue reading Jude v Her Majesty’s Advocate: SC 23 Nov 2011
It is unlawful for a court, as a public authority for the purposes of s. 6(3) of the 1998 Act, to act in a way incompatible with defendant’s rights enshrined in article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Judges: Lord Roger Citations: [2005] 2 Cr Ap R 32 … Continue reading Regina v Mustaq: CACD 2005
(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
The claimant alleged that his treatment in the police station had been wrongful. His solicitor, representing two clients, had refused to attend the interview with the claimant until he had seen the second client. There was a scene and the solicitor was excluded. The claimant said that this had unlawfully imposed a condition on his … Continue reading McDonagh, Regina (on The Application of) v Chief Constable of Leicestershire Constabulary: Admn 19 Dec 2013
(Grand Chamber) The applicant had been taken into custody before he was interrogated during his detention by police officers of the anti-terrorism branch of the Izmir Security Directorate. Held: There had been a violation of art 6(3)(c) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, in conjunction with art 6(1), because … Continue reading Salduz v Turkey: ECHR 27 Nov 2008
The claimant had been was arrested on his way home from a protest rally. He was made aware of his rights and expressly declined a lawyer. Held: As it was his own choice not to have a lawyer, the authorities could not be held responsible for the fact that he was not represented in the … Continue reading Galstyan v Armenia: ECHR 15 Nov 2007
(Gibraltar) The appellants sought to argue that the failure to allow an acquitted defendant any possible order for costs was a breach of the Constitution. Held: Section 8 of the Constitution, like its analogue article 6 of the European Convention, seeks to guarantee the procedural fairness of the criminal process. Though the Convention is not … Continue reading Her Majesty’s Attorney General for Gibraltar v Shimidzu (Berllaque, Intervenor): PC 28 Jun 2005
The defendant was convicted of fraud charges. He sought to have excluded statements made in interview on the basis that they had been obtained by oppressive behaviour by the police. His wife was very seriously ill in hospital and he had made the statement so that he could get out to see her. The police … Continue reading Regina v Mushtaq: HL 21 Apr 2005
The appellants appealed rejection of their application for judicial review. They were long term residents in a nursing home, which the respondents had decided to close. Held: Though the respondent did exercise some public functions, and its activities were in part paid for by public authorities, its activity of providing residential accommodation was not a … Continue reading Regina (Heather and Another) v Leonard Cheshire Foundation: CA 21 Mar 2002
The defendants appealed convictions for murder saying that the court had had read to it the statements of four witnesses who refused to attend for fear, having been intimidated. Other witnesses had been unco-operative and had been treated by the prosecution as hostile. Held: The appeal failed. The appellants’ rights under Article 6 were in … Continue reading Sellick and Sellick, Regina v: CACD 14 Mar 2005
The applicant had complained that, after his arrest he had been refused adequate access to a lawyer. He had not been allowed to see his solicitor for two days, and only then in the presence of a police officer. No inferences had been drawn from his silence in the period before access to his lawyer, … Continue reading Brennan v The United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Oct 2001
The court has a discretion to refuse to accept written evidence from a witness abroad who had refused to come here for fear of reprisals, and particularly so where the prosecution had failed to take advantage of procedures which would have allowed the defence to cross examine the witness. Citations: Times 07-Oct-1998 Statutes: European Convention … Continue reading Regina v Radak; Regina v Adjei; Regina v Butler-Rees; Regina v Meghjee: CACD 7 Oct 1998
The claimant’s son had been stabbed to death. She challenged the refusal of the coroner to continue with the inquest with a view to examining the responsibility of any of the police in having failed to protect him. Held: The question amounted to asking whether the coroner’s decision on the resumption should have been affected … Continue reading Hurst, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v London Northern District Coroner: HL 28 Mar 2007
The defendant challenged the obligatory requirement that evidence given by a person under 17 in sex or violent offence cases must normally be given by video link. Held: The purpose of the section was to improve the quality of the evidence presented to a court. There was no absolute right for a defendant to be … Continue reading D (A Minor), Regina (on the Application of) v Camberwell Green Youth Court: HL 27 Jan 2005
These appeals concern the statutory provisions governing the eligibility for compensation of persons convicted of a criminal offence where their conviction is subsequently quashed (or they are pardoned) because of the impact of fresh evidence. It was argued that the failure to make payment amounted to a denial of the right to the presumption of … Continue reading Hallam, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: SC 30 Jan 2019
In each case the local authority sought to recover possession of its own land. In the Lambeth case, they asserted this right as against an overstaying former tenant, and in the Leeds case as against gypsies. In each case the occupiers said that the recovery of possession interfered with their right respect for their family … Continue reading Kay and Another v London Borough of Lambeth and others; Leeds City Council v Price and others and others: HL 8 Mar 2006
The defendants appealed convictions for unlawful sexual intercourse with a girl under 16. They claimed that the availability to a defendant under 23 of a special defence which was not available to them because of their own age was discriminatory. Held: the absence of the defence was not discriminatory. A similar defence was available to … Continue reading Regina v Kirk; Regina v Russell: CACD 31 May 2002
(Jamaica) The defendant appealed his conviction for murder saying that the admission of an unsworn statement by one witness and the non-admission of another similar statement who did not either attend court was unconstitutional. He shot the victim 13 times with hollow point bullets. He claimed self defence, and drove straight to the police station … Continue reading Grant v The Queen: PC 16 Jan 2006
Ineta Ziemele, P 67318/09 22226/12 – Admissibility Decision, [2013] ECHR 578 Bailii European Convention on Human Rights, Criminal Justice Act 2003 46(3) Human Rights Citing: Legal Summary – Twomey, Cameron and Guthrie v The United Kingdom (Legal Summary) ECHR 28-May-2013 ECHR Criminal proceedingsArticle 6-1Fair hearingEquality of armsIndependent tribunalTrial by judge sitting alone owing to risk … Continue reading Twomey, Cameron And Guthrie v The United Kingdom (Judgment): ECHR 28 May 2013
The appellants had been convicted of murder, it being said that they had disposed of her body at sea. They now said that the delay between being first questioned and being charged infringed their rights to a trial within a reasonable time, and questioned whether they had has an impartial judge, he having also conducted … Continue reading O’Neill v Her Majesty’s Advocate No 2: SC 13 Jun 2013
Each defendant said they had not received a fair trial in that the court had admitted written evidence of a witness he had not been allowed to challenge. The witnesses had been victims, two of whom had died before trial. It was suggested that the court must implement the ECHR decision in Al-Khawaja. Held: The … Continue reading Horncastle and Others, Regina v: SC 9 Dec 2009
(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
No Anonymity for Witnessses in Criminal Trial K was convicted of armed robbery on the basis of statements of anonymous witnesses. He was unable to question those witnesses at any stage. Being unaware of the identity of the witnesses deprived K of the very particulars which would have enabled him to demonstrate the witnesses unreliability. … Continue reading Kostovski v The Netherlands: ECHR 20 Nov 1989
The applicants had been made subject of anti-social behaviour orders. They challenged the basis upon which the orders had been made. Held: The orders had no identifiable consequences which would make the process a criminal one. Civil standards of evidence therefore applied, and hearsay evidence was admissible. Nevertheless, the test as to whether it was … Continue reading Clingham (formerly C (a minor)) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea; Regina v Crown Court at Manchester Ex parte McCann and Others: HL 17 Oct 2002
The appellant complained that after arrest, though he had been advised of his right to legal advice, and had declined the offer, it was still wrong to have his subsequent interview relied upon at his trial. Held: It was not incompatible with Article 6(1) and 6(3)(c) for the Lord Advocate to lead and rely upon … Continue reading McGowan (Procurator Fiscal) v B: SC 23 Nov 2011
The House was asked whether a private care home when providing accommodation and care to a resident under arrangements with a local authority the 1948 Act, is performing ‘functions of a public nature’ for the purposes of section 6(3)(b) of the Human Rights Act 1998 and as such a ‘public authority’ subject to Convention rights … Continue reading YL v Birmingham City Council and Others: HL 20 Jun 2007
Three of the appellants were Polish citizens resisting European Arrest Warrants. A fourth (H), a British citizen, faced extradition to the USA. An order for the extradition of eachhad been made, and acting under advice each filed a notice of appeal from prison. The legal services department of the Prison service relayed the notices to … Continue reading Lukaszewski v The District Court In Torun, Poland: SC 23 May 2012
(Scotland) The appellant had been interviewed by police without being offered access to a solicitor. He complained that the interview and information obtained only through it had been used to found the prosecution. Held: The admission of the evidence may not infringe the defendant’s human rights. However, there is no absolute rule that the fruits … Continue reading Her Majesty’s Advocate v P: SC 6 Oct 2011
The Office appealed against decisions ordering it to release information about the gateway reviews for the proposed identity card system, claiming a qualified exemption from disclosure under the 2000 Act. Held: The decision was set aside for breaching the rule against impugning an action of Parliament. The minister had made a statement as to the … Continue reading Office of Government Commerce v Information Commissioner and Another: Admn 11 Apr 2008
The claimant had been found to have been wrongfully detained under section 3. He appealed against rejection of his claim for judicial review and for damages. The court found that his detention was lawful until declared otherwise. He argued that the restriction on compensation under the 1983 Act contravened the ECHR. Held: The detention was … Continue reading TTM v London Borough of Hackney and Others: CA 14 Jan 2011
(Fifth Section) The claimant said that having been arrested by police, their treatment of him amounted to torture.
Held: Iit was not necessary to rule on the Government’s preliminary objection of non-exhaustion of domestic remedies. It held, . .
(Grand Chamber) The claimant said that police treatment during his interview had amounted to torture.
Held: The Salduz principles were not restricted to the failure to provide access to a lawyer during interview. There is no clear consensus . .
The defendants appealed against their convictions after admission of secret tape recordings made by the police in breach, said the defendants of the 2000 Act and unlawful. The recordings had been in the police van. The Crown said that this was not a . .
