The applicant sought review of a decision to remove him from a witness protection scheme within the prison. He claimed that having been promised protection, he had a legitimate expectation of protection, having been told he would receive protection while he was in prison. He had not eventually been relied upon as a witness. Held: … Continue reading Bloggs 61, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 18 Jun 2003
The claimants had been detained under the 1971 Act, after completing sentences of imprisonment pending their return to their home countries under deportations recommended by the judges at trial, or chosen by the respondent. They challenged as unlawful the respondent’s, at first unpublished, policy introduced in 2006, that by default, those awaiting deportation should be … Continue reading Lumba (WL) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 23 Mar 2011
The claimant sought to challenge the decision of an Election court setting aside his election as a Member of Parliament. The court was asked to decide whether it had jurisdiction to review a determination by the Election Court of a point of law, and if so whether that court had correctly decided as to the … Continue reading Woolas, Regina (on The Application of) v The Speaker of The House of Commons: Admn 3 Dec 2010
The applicant had been found in contravention of the law requiring him not to take part in a broadcast within a short period before the election. He had given the interview some days before, and did not know when, or give thought to when, it might . .
A law which removed a prisoner’s right to vote whilst in prison was not incompatible with his human rights. The implied right to vote under article 3 was not absolute, and states had a wide margin of appreciation as to how and to what extent the right should be limited, provided that the conditions should … Continue reading Regina (Pearson Martinez and Hirst) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Others; Hirst v Attorney-General: QBD 17 Apr 2001
The claimants sought leave to appeal against rejection of their complaint that as serving prisoners they were unable to vote. Judges: Simon Brown LJ VP Citations:  EWCA Civ 927 Links: Bailii Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights 3, Representation of the People Act 1983 3(1) Jurisdiction: England and Wales Human Rights, Prisons, Constitutional, Elections … Continue reading Pearson and Another v Secretary of State for Home Department and Another: CA 18 Jun 2001
The claimant requested the defendant authority to remove his details from the electoral register before it was sold on to third parties. They refused. He claimed that the information had been obtained from him under penalty of criminal charges, and that to sell it on was an interference with his right to a private and … Continue reading Reid, Robertson v City of Wakefield Metropolitan Council, Secretary of State for the Home Department: Admn 16 Nov 2001
Administrative Discretion to be Used Reasonably The applicant challenged the manner of decision making as to the conditions which had been attached to its licence to open the cinema on Sundays. It had not been allowed to admit children under 15 years of age. The statute provided no appeal procedure, and the applicant sought a … Continue reading Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation: CA 10 Nov 1947
(Northern Ireland) The deceased solicitor was murdered in his home in 1989, allegedly by loyalists. They had never been identified, though collusion between security forces and a loyalist paramilitary was established. The ECHR and a judge led inquiry had said that a proper investigation was required. A promised inquiry under the 2005 Act was objected … Continue reading Finucane, Re Application for Judicial Review: SC 27 Feb 2019
The claimant complained of misfeasance in public office by the prisons for having opened and read protected correspondence whilst he was in prison. The respondent argued that he had suffered no loss. The judge had found that bad faith was established in three prison officers. In one case the officer opened the letter in front … Continue reading Watkins v Home Office and others: HL 29 Mar 2006
Movement retsriction was not Liberty Deprivation The claimants had been present during a demonstration policed by the respondent. They appealed against dismissal of their claims for false imprisonment having been prevented from leaving Oxford Circus for over seven hours. The claimants appealed against rejection of their claims on human rights law. Held: The appeal failed. … Continue reading Austin and Another v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis: HL 28 Jan 2009
A local election result had been set aside for fraud in the winning Conservative candidate. The Commissioner made an order for costs against his party which was now challenged for lack of jurisdiction the Commissioner being functus officio, and the court was now asked to determine the extent to which someone who was not a … Continue reading The Conservative and Unionist Party v The Election Commissioner and Others: Admn 19 Feb 2010
The claimants sought to issue election petitions to challenge the results of local elections. The petitioners had complied with all the rules save that they had failed to serve the notice of presentation within the five day period. The claimants argued that the Civil Procedure Rules took sway over the Election Rules, and that the … Continue reading Ullah and Others, Ahmed v Pagel, Scallan, Kennedy: CA 12 Dec 2002
A Dutch national detained in hospital complained that his detention had divested him of his capacity to administer his property, and thus there had been determination of his civil rights and obligations without the guarantee of a judicial procedure. Held: Article 5(1)(a) is concerned with the question whether the detention is permissible. Its object and … Continue reading Winterwerp v The Netherlands: ECHR 24 Oct 1979
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
Extension oh Human Rights Beyond Borders The appellants complained that the system set up by the respondent where Home Office officers were placed in Prague airport to pre-vet applicants for asylum from Romania were dsicriminatory in that substantially more gypsies were refused entry than others, and that it was contrary to the obligations of the … Continue reading Regina v Immigration Officer at Prague Airport and another, ex parte European Roma Rights Centre and others: HL 9 Dec 2004
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 petitioners, convicted serving prisoners, had sought judicial review of the refusal to allow them to vote in the Scottish Referendum on Independence. The request had been refused in the Outer and Inner Houses. Held: (Kerr, Wilson JJSC dissenting) The ban did not infringe the prisoners’ human rights. The referendum was not an election to … Continue reading Moohan and Another v The Lord Advocate: SC 17 Dec 2014
A trial had not yet been begun, but the court was now asked a point of pure statutory construction relating to the manner in which election expenses are required to be calculated and declared. The defendants face charges of knowingly making false . .
The prisoner claimant appealed against refusal of his request for judicial review of his disenfranchisement whilst a prisoner.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. It was not possible to read into the Act as suggested a duty on a judge on . .
The parties had contracted for sale and purchase of butane for processing. It was said to have been contaminated. The parties now disputed the effect on damages for breach including on causation, remoteness, mitigation and quantum.
Held: The . .
The prisoner claimed that his right to vote had not been re-instated despite a year having passed since the European Court of Human Rights had found that the withdrawal of that right for prisoners was an infringement.
Held: It was not possible . .
Keith J had countermanded a forthcoming local election, and made an order under section 39(1) for a new election. The claimants had sought to stand but had not been allowed to do so, the returning officer having rejected their nomination papers. The . .