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 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 subject to a system of supervision by the courts. The parties now disputed whether the Act gave … Continue reading MB, Re, Secretary of State for the Home Department v MB: Admn 12 Apr 2006
The appellants were widowers whose wives had died at a time when the benefits a widow would have received were denied to widowers. The legislation had since changed but they variously sought compensation for the unpaid sums. Held: The appeal succeeded. By 1995 discrimination as to pensions was no longer supportable. And those appellants pursuing … Continue reading Hooper and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: CA 18 Jun 2003
The appellant faced a criminal trial. He was granted legal aid for two counsel. He asked for two particular junior counsel, but the certificate required him to instruct leading counsel and a junior. He objected that this deprived him of the right to his chosen counsel. Held: The appeal failed. The purpose of a defendant’s … Continue reading Maguire, Re Application for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland): SC 21 Mar 2018
Citations: 25703/11 – Chamber Judgment, [2013] ECHR 1205 Links: Bailii Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights Jurisdiction: Human Rights Cited by: Cited – Dvorski v Croatia ECHR 20-Oct-2015 Grand Chamber: ‘As the Court has already held in its previous judgments, the right set out in article 6.3(c) of the Convention is one element, among others, … Continue reading Dvorski v Croatia: ECHR 28 Nov 2013
(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 had been a Russian spy whilst in British Intelligence, escaping from prison and fleeing to Russia in 1966. He now complained that an action by the respondent government to seek to recover royalties from a book had been so extended in time as to deny him a fair trial. The proceedings had lasted … Continue reading Blake v The United Kingdom: ECHR 26 Sep 2006
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 fairness of the trial had to be considered as a whole. There … Continue reading McKenna v Her Majesty’s Advocate: ScHC 30 Dec 1999
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion) ; Violation of P1-1 ; No violation of Art. 6-1 ; Violation of Art. 13 ; Pecuniary damage – financial award ; Costs and expenses partial awardThe claimant company alleged that its human rights had been violated in that it had been ordered to pay … Continue reading Stockholms Forsakrings- Och Skadestandsjuridik Ab v Sweden: ECHR 16 Sep 2003
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) – 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
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 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
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 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
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
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
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 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
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
The applicant complained that the members of a court-martial were appointed by the Convening Officer, who was closely linked to the prosecuting authorities. The members of the court-martial were subordinate in rank to the Convening Officer who had the power in prescribed circumstances to dissolve the court-martial either before or during the trial. The Strasbourg … Continue reading Findlay v The United Kingdom: ECHR 25 Feb 1997
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
The defendant had been convicted of knowingly living on the earnings of prostitution contrary to section 30(1) of the Sexual Offences Act 1956. Held: The Commission rejected as manifestly ill-founded the applicant’s challenge to this provision as incompatible with article 6(2). It created a rebuttable presumption which the defendant could disprove, and was not a … Continue reading X v United Kingdom: ECHR 1972
The claimant challenged to the power of the Secretary of State to set a tariff where the sentence was imposed pursuant to section 53(1). The setting of the tariff was found to be a sentencing exercise which failed to comply with Article 6(1) of the European Convention in that the decision maker was the Secretary … Continue reading V v The United Kingdom; T v The United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Dec 1999
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 applicant owned land in the parish of St Martin’s in Guernsey. He made a number of applications for planning permission for residential use, but they were all rejected. In about 1986 he moved into a converted packing shed on his land. In 1988 a draft Detailed Development Plan for the island was under consideration … Continue reading McGonnell v The United Kingdom: ECHR 8 Feb 2000
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 . .
The applicant, a Belgian butcher, paid a fine by way of settlement in the face of an order for the closure of his shop until judgment was given in an intended criminal prosecution or until such fine was paid.
Held: Since the payment was made . .
. .
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 . .
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
