The defendants were to face trial on charges of making funds available to Iraq in breach of the 2000 Order. They said that the 2000 Order was ultra vires and ineffective, not having been made ‘forthwith’ after the UN resolution it was based upon, but some ten years later. Held: The appeal failed. The comparison … Continue reading Forsyth, Regina v, Regina v Mabey: SC 23 Feb 2011
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
The defendant was convicted of murder. Evidence during the trial suggested a possibility of manslaughter, but neither the defence nor prosecution proposed the alternate verdict. The defendant now appealed saying that the judge had an independent duty to leave that option to the jury. Held: The appeal succeeded. The judge should have left a manslaughter … Continue reading Regina v Coutts: HL 19 Jul 2006
The claimant challenged fines imposed on him after three illegal immigrants were found to have hidden in his lorry in the immigration control zone at Dunkirk. The 1999 At was to have been amended by the 2002 Act, and the implementation was by the 2002 Order. That Order was now said to be ineffective. Held: … Continue reading Bogdanic v The Secretary of State for The Home Department: QBD 29 Aug 2014
(Iraq Sanctions) The court was asked as to the manner in which Security Council Resolutions relating to the arms trade are implemented in the domestic law of the United Kingdom under the United Nations Act 1946.
Held: Laws LJ, rejecting an . .
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
The applicants were suspected of terrorist associations. Their bank accounts and similar had been frozen. They challenged the Order in Council under which the orders had been made without an opportunity for parliamentary challenge or approval. Held: The Orders must be set aside. ‘It is I think obvious that this procedure does not begin to … Continue reading A, K, M, Q and G v HM Treasury: Admn 24 Apr 2008
The Treasury appealed against an order quashing its own 2006 Orders, giving effect to the obligations on the United Kingdom as a member of the United Nations to ensure that the assets of an individual designated by the UN were to be subject to . .
The defendant raised as a preliminary point the question of whether the claimant, an Iraqi, was an enemy alien, and therefore debarred from bringing proceedings to recover.
Held: Under modern law it could not be a requirement that a state of . .