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
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
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
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
ECHR Judgment (Merits) – No violation of Art. 6-1 and 6-3-d. Citations: 10075/02, [2005] ECHR 80 Links: Worldlii, Bailii Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights 6.1 Human Rights Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227588
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
Hudoc No violation of Art. 6-1 ; No violation of P1-1 ; No violation of Art. 13The applicant complained that the unification of two parcels of land occupied by him, and registered in the Austrian land registry, and without his consent, infringed his property and human rights. The procedure did not require his consent. He … Continue reading Kienast v Austria: ECHR 23 Jan 2003
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
(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
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
(The High Court of Justiciary) The defendant appealed on the basis that the delay in the sentencing process had resulted in an infringement of his human rights. Held: The appeal itself had been without merit. The delay had been to such an extent as to amount to an infringement of his human rights, but this … Continue reading Mills v HM Advocate and Another: PC 22 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
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
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
The requirement to pay fees to civil courts in connection with claims they are asked to determine could not in itself be regarded as a restriction on the right of access to a court that was incompatible with article 6(1). Article 6(1) secures to everyone the right to have any claim relating to his civil … Continue reading Kreuz v Poland: ECHR 19 Jun 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
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
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
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
The applicant had faced charges of hiring someone to kill his wife. He complained about the use of a recording of his telephone conversation with the man he hired recorded unlawfully by that man. Held: The ECHR does not address issues about the admissibility of evidence in the abstract or to deal with them as … Continue reading Schenk v Switzerland: ECHR 12 Jul 1988
The defendant complained that he had been tried and convicted in his absence. Held: The right to a fair trial had been breached: ‘the object and purpose of [article 6] taken as a whole show that a person ‘charged with a criminal offence’ is entitled to take part in the hearing. Moreover, sub-paragraphs (c), (d) … Continue reading Colozza v Italy: ECHR 12 Feb 1985
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
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
(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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
The prosecutor appealed against a stay of the prosecution as an abuse of process. It was alleged that the defendant solicitor had permitted a relation of his partner to launder the proceeds of a tax fraud. The principal defendant had been substantially acquitted of the offences alleged to be a fraud. The defendant had been … Continue reading RCPO v C: CACD 5 Feb 2010
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
(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 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
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
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
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
ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 6-1; Not necessary to examine Art. 13+6 and 14+6; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses . .
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection allowed (non-exhaustion) (Art. 14+6); Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion) (Art. 6); Preliminary objection rejected (out of time) . .
Two fraud prosecutions against the claimants had lasted for 15 and 20 years respectively.
Held: Article 6.1 applies to all stages of criminal proceedings, including sentencing and any appeal. The ‘reasonable time’ in criminal matters, . .
Hudoc Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); No violation of Art. 6-1; Not necessary to examine Art. 14+6-1
‘the Court’s task is to ascertain whether the proceedings in their entirety were ‘fair’ . .
Hudoc No violation of P1-1; No violation of Art. 6-1
An aeroplane was seized as liable to forfeiture pursuant to section 141(1) of the 1979 Act. It was restored on payment of a penalty of andpound;50,000. . .
Hudoc Judgment (Just satisfaction) Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses award – domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses award – Convention . .
Hudoc Judgment (Just satisfaction) Struck out of the list; Pecuniary damage – financial award; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient
‘possessions’ can be ‘existing possessions’ or assets, . .
The defendant had been sentenced to a non-custodial sentence, but the crown appealed, and two years later, a custodial sentence was substituted.
Held: The delay was a breach of the Convention’s reasonable time requirement under article 6 of . .
. .
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses award – Convention proceedings
On 1 April 1992, the applicant, charged with . .
. .
The applicant had been convicted of serious offences, in part in reliance upon inferences drawn from his partial silence during interview. At trial, he said this had been on legal advice, and was ready to answer questions about that advice, but none . .
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 . .
(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 . .
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. . .
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 . .
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 . .
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 . .
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
‘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
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
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
Parties challenged the compliance of proceedings with the convention where there had been considerable delay. Held: The reasonable detention provision (article 5(3)) and the reasonable time requirement (article 6(1)) conferred free-standing rights, which could be broken notwithstanding absence of effect on the fairness of the trial. The threshold for delay was high, but once established … Continue reading Dyer v Watson and Burrows: PC 29 Jan 2002
The applicant complained that her criminal trial had been conducted unfairly, insofar as the judge had interfered so heavily as to make it difficult for her to present her case. The English Court of Appeal had criticised the judge, but concluded that the result remained fair. Held: Though the trial was subject to criticism, she … Continue reading CG v The United Kingdom: ECHR 19 Dec 2001
When the Home Secretary set a tariff sentence for a mandatory life sentence prisoner, in order to satisfy the requirement for retribution and deterrence, that exercise was not a judicial sentencing exercise to which the provisions of the Human Rights legislation applied. The issues he considered were wider than those involved in the strict sentencing … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Anderson Same v Same, ex parte Taylor: QBD 27 Feb 2001
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
It was an infringement of the defendant’s right to a fair trial for the trial judge not to be involved in ex parte applications to exclude evidence. The defect could not be remedied by the same evidence later being presented also to the appeal court on an ex parte basis. There is a general requirement … Continue reading Atlan v The United Kingdom: ECHR 19 Jun 2001
The accused had been convicted. After exercising his right to silence, there were read to the court accounts of statements made by co-accused but without an opportunity for him to cross examine the witnesses. Held: Saunders had established the integral part of a fair trial played by the right of silence. The inability to cross … Continue reading Luca v Italy: ECHR 27 Feb 2001
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
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1 (independent tribunal); No violation of Art. 6-1 (fair trial); Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedingsThe applicant was a dairy farmer. Under the scheme operated within the European Community for reducing surplus milk products, he was allocated a milk … Continue reading Van De Hurk v The Netherlands: ECHR 19 Apr 1994
The fact that the elderly victim of the robbery of which the defendant had been convicted had failed to pick out Mr Edwards when she was shown two volumes of photographs of possible burglars which included his photograph was not disclosed to the defence. One of the police witnesses said that no fingerprints were found … Continue reading Edwards v The United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Dec 1992
The applicant claimed that proceedings under which he had been accused of fraud in dishonestly evading VAT liability were in reality criminal proceedings and that the minimum standards of a fair trial applied. Held: The characterisation under the rules of such proceedings as civil was a starting point only. The fact that no sanction of … Continue reading Han and Yau t/a Murdishaw Supper Bar, and Others v Commissioners of Customs and Excise: CA 3 Jul 2001
The court was asked whether the processes by which the Secretary of State for the Environment Transport and the Regions (SSETR) makes decisions under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (TCPA) and orders under the Transport and Works Act 1992 (TWA), the Highways Act 1980 (HA) and the Acquisition of Land Act 1981 (ALA) … Continue reading Regina (Holding and Barnes Plc) v Secretary of State for Environment, Transport and Regions; Regina (Premier Leisure UK Limited) v Secretary of State for Environment, Transport and Regions; Regina (Alconbury) etc: Admn 13 Dec 2000
(Professional Conduct Committee of the GDC) The procedures of the General Dental Council were in breach of the right to a fair trial, insofar as the same person might both carry out the preliminary stages of an investigation, and later be involved in the hearing of the complaint itself. In this case the chairman had … Continue reading Preiss v General Dental Council: PC 17 Jul 2001
The court considered complaints by the applicants as to the system of control orders imposed on them. Citations: [2008] ECHR 421, 3455/05 Links: Bailii Statutes: Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001, European Convention on Human Rights 3 5.1 5.4 Jurisdiction: Human Rights Citing: Cited – A and Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 21-Jan-2008 The … Continue reading A and others v The United Kingdom: ECHR 21 May 2008
When assessing whether the defendant’s right to a trial within a reasonable time had been infringed, the court should look as from the date at which he was charged, or served with a summons, and not from the date of the first interview. Although a suspect could suffer material prejudice from the date of the … Continue reading Attorney General’s Reference (No 2 of 2001): CACD 12 Jul 2001
The claimant had been sole director of a company which went into liquidation. He sought a redundancy payment from the respondent under the 1996 Act. It was refused. The tribunal had applied Buchan. It had refused to hear an argument that the tribunal chairman was also employed by the respondent and could not therefore be … Continue reading Smith v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry: EAT 15 Oct 1999
Grand Chamber – Article 13 guarantees an effective remedy before a national authority for an alleged breach of the requirement under Article 6.1 to hear a case within a reasonable time. Citations: 156, ECHR 2000-XI, 30210/96 Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights 12 6.1 Jurisdiction: Human Rights Cited by: Cited – Umek v Slovenia ECHR … Continue reading Kudla v Poland: ECHR 2000
The house was asked whether it might be correct to stay criminal proceedings as an abuse where for delay. The defendants were prisoners in a prison riot in 1998. The case only came on for trial in 2001, when they submitted that the delay was an abuse. Held: The defendants had a right to a … Continue reading Attorney-General’s Reference (No 2 of 2001): HL 11 Dec 2003
(Grand Chamber) Complaint as to non-disclosure of prosecution evidence. Held: The holding and use of the information in question had not been ‘in accordance with the law’, as required by article 8(2), because of the absence from the relevant national legislation of adequate protection against arbitrary interference. Judges: Mrs E Palm P Citations: (2000) 30 … Continue reading Amann v Switzerland: ECHR 16 Feb 2000
The Convention gave a right to a fair reputation which had to be upheld in the law, but the disciplinary procedures within a school independent appeal panel did not directly affect that reputation, and the procedures had been designed to respect the potential for damage, and to provide proper protection. It was not necessary in … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for Education and Employment and Others ex parte B, Regina v Same ex parte T, Regina v Same, ex parte C: QBD 8 Jun 2001
National Security Certificates issued in Northern Ireland which had the effect of preventing his making a claim of discrimination, was disproportionate. The Act guaranteed person’s a right not to be discriminated for religious belief or political opinion in the job market. That is a civil right. The government argued that since the post applied for … Continue reading Devlin v The United Kingdom: ECHR 30 Oct 2001
A breach of article 6.2 of the Convention in a trial need not automatically lead to the conclusion that the conviction was unsafe. The judge had failed to direct the jury to the effect that the offence of robbery required proof of the element of dishonesty. The court was entitled to conclude that that would … Continue reading Regina v Williams: CACD 30 Mar 2001
The judge failed to give a direction in accordance with recommendations from the Judicial Studies Board and counsel in the case as to the need for the jury not to draw inferences from the defendants’ failure to mention certain facts on interview. The concepts of fairness and safety were accepted to be different, but the … Continue reading Regina v Francom; Regina v Latif (Clare); Regina v Latif (Melna); Regina v Bevis; Regina v Harker: CACD 24 Oct 2000
There was breach of the convention because of length of time the Defendants had been held until their trial. Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (ratione temporis); Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); Preliminary objection rejected (victim, estoppel); Violation of Art. 5-3; Violation of Art. 6-1; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses … Continue reading Yagei and Sargin v Turkey: ECHR 26 Jun 1995
