Click the case name for better results:

Regina v Lambert; Regina v Ali; Regina v Jordan: CACD 14 Sep 2000

Each defendant was charged under a statute which provided a defence if they could prove a certain element. They complained that this was a breach of their human rights. The complaint was rejected. It would be wrong to impose a burden of proof on a defendant as regards a main element of a crime, but … Continue reading Regina v Lambert; Regina v Ali; Regina v Jordan: CACD 14 Sep 2000

Tse Wai Chun Paul v Albert Cheng; 13 Nov 2000

References: [2001] EMLR 777, [2000] 3 HKLRD 418, [2000] HKCFA 35 Links: hklii Coram: Chief Justice Li, Mr Justice Bokhary PJ, Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ, Sir Denys Roberts NPJ and Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead NPJ (Court of Final Appeal of Hong Kong) For the purposes of the defence to defamation of fair comment: ‘The comment … Continue reading Tse Wai Chun Paul v Albert Cheng; 13 Nov 2000

Acts

1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts

Alabaster v Barclays Bank Plc and Another: CA 3 May 2005

The claimant sought increased maternity pay. Before beginning her maternity leave she had been awarded a pay increase, but it was not backdated so as to affect the period upon which the calculation of her average pay was based. The court made a detailed comparison of the regimes for protection under the Employment Rights Act … Continue reading Alabaster v Barclays Bank Plc and Another: CA 3 May 2005

Selmouni v France: ECHR 28 Jul 1999

Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); Violation of Art. 3; Violation of Art. 6-1; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses award – Convention proceedingsThe claimant said that he had been severely beaten whilst detained in police custody for interview. Held: ‘Article 3 enshrines one of the most fundamental values … Continue reading Selmouni v France: ECHR 28 Jul 1999

Fox, Campbell and Hartley v The United Kingdom: ECHR 30 Aug 1990

The court considered the required basis for a reasonable suspicion to found an arrest without a warrant: ‘The ‘reasonableness’ of the suspicion on which an arrest must be based forms an essential part of the safeguard against arbitrary arrest and detention which is laid down in Article 5(1)(c). The court agrees with the Commission and … Continue reading Fox, Campbell and Hartley v The United Kingdom: ECHR 30 Aug 1990

Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2): HL 10 Jul 2003

The respondent appealed against a finding that the provision which made a loan agreement completely invalid for lack of compliance with the 1974 Act was itself invalid under the Human Rights Act since it deprived the respondent lender of its property rights. It was also argued that it was not possible to make a declaration … Continue reading Wilson v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry; Wilson v First County Trust Ltd (No 2): HL 10 Jul 2003

HM Treasury v Ahmed and Others: SC 27 Jan 2010

The claimants objected to orders made freezing their assets under the 2006 Order, after being included in the Consolidated List of suspected members of terrorist organisations. Held: The orders could not stand. Such orders were made by the executive without parliamentary scrutiny by the use of Orders in Council. Statutory provision for counter-terrorism was in … Continue reading HM Treasury v Ahmed and Others: SC 27 Jan 2010

A and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department (No 2): HL 8 Dec 2005

Evidence from 3rd Party Torture Inadmissible The applicants had been detained following the issue of certificates issued by the respondent that they posed a terrorist threat. They challenged the decisions of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission saying that evidence underlying the decisions had probably been obtained by torture committed by foreign powers, and should not … Continue reading A and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department (No 2): HL 8 Dec 2005

Norris v Government of United States of America: SC 24 Feb 2010

The defendant faced extradition to the USA on charges of the obstruction of justice. He challenged the extradition on the basis that it would interfere with his article 8 rights to family life, given that the offence was merely ancillary, the result would be disproportionate. The court was asked whether in order to found such … Continue reading Norris v Government of United States of America: SC 24 Feb 2010

Huang v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 21 Mar 2007

Appellate Roles – Human Rights – Families Split The House considered the decision making role of immigration appellate authorities when deciding appeals on Human Rights grounds, against refusal of leave to enter or remain, under section 65. In each case the asylum applicant had had his own request refused but that of his family had … Continue reading Huang v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 21 Mar 2007

Regina v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs ex parte Quark Fishing Limited: HL 13 Oct 2005

The applicant had previously received licences to fish for Patagonian Toothfish off South Georgia. The defendant had instructed the issuer of the licence in such a way that it was not renewed. It now had to establish that its article 1 rights had been infringed in order to claim damages. Held: The appeal succeeded, and … Continue reading Regina v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs ex parte Quark Fishing Limited: HL 13 Oct 2005

Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza: HL 21 Jun 2004

Same Sex Partner Entitled to tenancy Succession The protected tenant had died. His same-sex partner sought a statutory inheritance of the tenancy. Held: His appeal succeeded. The Fitzpatrick case referred to the position before the 1998 Act: ‘Discriminatory law undermines the rule of law because it is the antithesis of fairness. It brings the law … Continue reading Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza: HL 21 Jun 2004

Secretary of State for the Home Department v Rehman: HL 11 Oct 2001

The applicant, a Pakistani national had entered the UK to act as a Muslim priest. The Home Secretary was satisfied that he was associated with a Muslim terrorist organisation, and refused indefinite leave to remain. The Home Secretary provided both open and closed statements to the tribunal. The open statement accepted that the organisation was … Continue reading Secretary of State for the Home Department v Rehman: HL 11 Oct 2001

A v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 16 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

Regina v Abu Hamza: CACD 28 Nov 2006

The defendant had faced trial on terrorist charges. He claimed that delay and the very substantial adverse publicity had made his fair trial impossible, and that it was not an offence for a foreign national to solicit murders to be carried out abroad. Held: The appeal failed. Murder is singled out as an offence even … Continue reading Regina v Abu Hamza: CACD 28 Nov 2006

Ibrahim And Others v The United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Dec 2014

The applicants alleged a violation of Article 6-1 and 3 (c) in that they had been interviewed by the police without access to a lawyer and that the evidence obtained from those interviews was used at their respective trials. Held: As to the first three claimants: ‘the applicants, not the prosecution, brought the safety interview … Continue reading Ibrahim And Others v The United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Dec 2014

Christie v Leachinsky: HL 25 Mar 1947

Arrested Person must be told basis of the Arrest Police officers appealed against a finding of false imprisonment. The plaintiff had been arrested under the 1921 Act, but this provided no power of arrest (which the appellant knew). The officers might lawfully have arrested the plaintiff for the felony of stealing a bale of cloth, … Continue reading Christie v Leachinsky: HL 25 Mar 1947

Gul (H) v Regina: CACD 31 Jul 2012

The defendant appealed against his conviction for conveying ‘List A’ articles into prison. He said that the proceedings had been a nullity for failure to comply with the requirements of Schedule 3 of the 1998 Act. He had not been notified of the . .