Click the case name for better results:

Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002: CACD 21 Mar 2003

The defendant had been tried for an offence under the Act of being a member of a proscribed organisation, and professing membership of Hamas. At trial the Crown accepted an evidential burden, that the offence had to be read down to comply with the defendant’s article 6.2 rights, and the defendant was acquitted. A reference … Continue reading Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002: CACD 21 Mar 2003

Hundal and Dhaliwal, Regina v: CACD 3 Feb 2004

The defendants appealed against conviction and sentence for membership of an organisation proscribed under the 2000 Act. The defendants said that at the time they joined the organisation was not proscribed, and had left before it became proscribed. They said that they had gone to Germany to make explicit their resignations and were stopped on … Continue reading Hundal and Dhaliwal, Regina v: CACD 3 Feb 2004

Sheldrake v Director of Public Prosecutions; Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002: HL 14 Oct 2004

Appeals were brought complaining as to the apparent reversal of the burden of proof in road traffic cases and in cases under the Terrorism Acts. Was a legal or an evidential burden placed on a defendant? Held: Lord Bingham of Cornhill said: ‘The overriding concern is that a trial should be fair, and the presumption … Continue reading Sheldrake v Director of Public Prosecutions; Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002: HL 14 Oct 2004

Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Raissi: CA 12 Nov 2008

The Commissioner appealed against an award of damages for false imprisonment. The claimant had been arrested shortly after a terrorist attack. The judge had held that they had no reasonable belief of his involvement. The Commissioner did not now pursue an argument of necessity. Held: The only cause suggested for suspicion of the claimant was … Continue reading Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Raissi: CA 12 Nov 2008

Hammond, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 1 Dec 2005

The claimants had been convicted of murder, but their tariffs had not yet been set when the 2003 Act came into effect. They said that the procedure under which their sentence tarriffs were set were not compliant with their human rights in that the tarriff was set by reference back to a judge without a … Continue reading Hammond, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 1 Dec 2005