B, a former senior member of the security services wished to publish his memoirs. He was under contractual and statutory obligations of confidentiality. He sought judicial review of a decision not to allow him to publish parts of the book, saying it was vitiated by bias, and in breach of his right to freedom of exptession. The respondent argued that under the 2000 Act, he could only seek a remedy before the Investigatory Powers Tribunal. The claimant said that the Human Rights act required any claim under it to be brought in the High Court.
Held: Any challenge must be brought exclusively before the tribunal. Parliament had not intended to allow such questions to be raised other than in the tribunal. A court hearing such issues would necessarily receive matters relating to the security of the service, and the tribunal had counterbalancing powers intended to achieve fairness. In this case A had by now already received sufficient information about the objections to allow him to comply with his obligations when writing such a book.
A powerful pointer against the proposition that Parliament had intended to leave it to a complainant to choose whether to bring proceedings in court or before the IPT was: ‘the self-evident need to safeguard the secrecy and security of sensitive intelligence material, not least with regard to the intelligence services. It is to this end, and to protect the ‘neither confirm nor deny’ policy . . .that the Rules are as restrictive as they are regarding the closed nature of the IPT’s hearings and the limited disclosure of information to the complainant (both before and after the IPT’s determination)’.
Lord Phillips, President, Lord Hope, Deputy President, Lord Brown, Lord Mance, Lord Clarke
Times 11-Dec-2009, [2009] UKSC 12, UKSC 2009/0020, [2010] 2 WLR 1, [2010] UKHRR 568, [2010] 2 AC 1, [2010] HRLR 11, [2010] 1 All ER 1149
Bailii, SC, SC Summ, Bailii Summary
Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 65(2)(a), Official Secrets Act 1989, European Convention on Human Rights 10, Human Rights Act 1998 7(1)(a), Investigatory Powers Tribunal Rules 2000 (SI 2000/2665)
England and Wales
Citing:
At First Instance – A v B; Regina (A) v Director of Establishments of the Security Service Admn 4-Jul-2008
The claimant a retired senior officer in the intelligence services wished to publish a book of his memoirs. He was refused permission for his duty of confidentiality, and said that this infringed his human rights. The Director denied his right to . .
Appeal from – A v B CA 18-Feb-2009
The claimant a former senior member of the Security Services sought to challenge a decision refusing permission to pulish his memoirs in full. The respondent argues that the Investigatory Powers Tribunal had exclusive jurisdiction. The respondent . .
Cited – Pyx Granite Ltd v Ministry of Housing and Local Government HL 1959
There is a strong presumption that Parliament will not legislate to prevent individuals affected by legal measures promulgated by executive public bodies having a fair opportunity to challenge these measures and to vindicate their rights in court . .
Cited – Anisminic Ltd v Foreign Compensation Commission HL 17-Dec-1968
There are no degrees of nullity
The plaintiffs had owned mining property in Egypt. Their interests were damaged and or sequestrated and they sought compensation from the Respondent Commission. The plaintiffs brought an action for the declaration rejecting their claims was a . .
Cited – IN THE MATTER OF APPLICATIONS Nos. IPT/01/62 and IPT/01/77 IPT 23-Jan-2003
Rule 9(6) was ultra vires section 69 of RIPA as being incompatible with article 6 of the Convention but that ‘in all other respects the Rules are valid and binding on the Tribunal and are compatible with articles 6, 8 and 10 of the Convention’. . .
Cited – Hanlon v The Law Society HL 1981
The House considered the impact of the statutory charge under the 1974 Act in matrimonial proceedings.
Held: The costs in respect of which the statutory charge bit were the costs of the whole divorce proceedings and not just the financial . .
Cited – Secretary of State for Defence v Al-Skeini and others (The Redress Trust Intervening) HL 13-Jun-2007
Complaints were made as to the deaths of six Iraqi civilians which were the result of actions by a member or members of the British armed forces in Basra. One of them, Mr Baha Mousa, had died as a result of severe maltreatment in a prison occupied . .
Cited – Farley v Child Support Agency and Another; Farley v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (No. 2) HL 28-Jun-2006
Magistrates were wrong to think they had a discretion to look at the validity of a liability assessment under child support legislation. The Act gave the payer alternative avenues of appeal, and therefore the Act should be read as it stated and the . .
Cited – The Sunday Times v The United Kingdom (No 2) ECHR 26-Nov-1991
Any prior restraint on freedom of expression calls for the most careful scrutiny. ‘Freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of a democratic society subject to paragraph (2) of Article 10. It is applicable not only to . .
Cited – Regina v Special Adjudicator ex parte Ullah; Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 17-Jun-2004
The applicants had had their requests for asylum refused. They complained that if they were removed from the UK, their article 3 rights would be infringed. If they were returned to Pakistan or Vietnam they would be persecuted for their religious . .
Cited – IN THE MATTER OF APPLICATIONS Nos. IPT/01/62 and IPT/01/77 IPT 23-Jan-2003
Rule 9(6) was ultra vires section 69 of RIPA as being incompatible with article 6 of the Convention but that ‘in all other respects the Rules are valid and binding on the Tribunal and are compatible with articles 6, 8 and 10 of the Convention’. . .
Cited – Regina v Shayler HL 21-Mar-2002
The defendant had been a member of the security services. On becoming employed, and upon leaving, he had agreed to keep secret those matters disclosed to him. He had broken those agreements and was being prosecuted. He sought a decision that the . .
Cited – Esbester v United Kingdom ECHR 2-Apr-1993
(Commission) The claimant had been refused employment within the Central Office of Information. He had been accepted subject to clearance, but that failed. He objected that he had been given no opportunity to object to the material oin which his . .
Cited – Dimond v Lovell CA 29-Apr-1999
Mrs Dimond had a car accident as a result of Mr Lovell’s negligence and sought to recover from him the cost of the hire of a replacement vehicle while her car was being repaired. Under clause 5 of the hire agreement the hire company had the conduct . .
Cited – Depositors’ Protection Board v Dalia HL 20-May-1994
The House was asked as to the meaning of the word ‘depositor’. Regulations were prayed in aid which were made four years after the date of the enactment.
Held: The protection given by the Depositor Protection Scheme does not extend to . .
Cited – Regina v Kansal (2) HL 29-Nov-2001
The prosecutor had lead and relied at trial on evidence obtained by compulsory questioning under the 1986 Act.
Held: In doing so the prosecutor was acting to give effect to section 433.
The decision in Lambert to disallow retrospective . .
Cited – 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 of its property . .
Cited by:
Cited – AJA and Others v Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis and Others CA 5-Nov-2013
The Court was asked whether the Investigatory Powers Tribunal had the power to investigate whether police officers acrting as undercover agents, and having sexual relations with those they were themselves investigating had infringed the human rights . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Media, Human Rights
Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.383785
