Category: Human Rights

Vinter, Bamber And Moore v The United Kingdom: ECHR 9 Feb 2011

(Statement of Facts) Prisoners appealed saying that the imposition of a whole life tariff on their life term by the judge, so that they could only be released at the discretion of the Home Secretary, and that this was inhuman treatment.

Judges:

Judges Garlicki, David Thorbe Jorgivsson and Nicolaou

Citations:

66069/09, [2011] ECHR 324

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 3, Crime (Sentences) Act 1997 30(1), Criminal Justice Act 2003

Cited by:

Statement of facts – Vinter, Bamber And Moore v The United Kingdom ECHR 17-Jan-2012
The prisoners appealed saying that the whole life terms set on the imposition of a life sentence for murder were a breach of their human rights.
Held: The continued detention of three defendants who had been made subject to a whole life tariff . .
Statement of Facts – Vinter And Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 9-Jul-2013
(Grand Chamber) The three appellants had each been convicted of exceptionally serious murders, and been sentenced to mandatory life sentences, but with provision that they could not be eligible for early release, making them whole life terms. They . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 03 September 2022; Ref: scu.430152

P and Q v Surrey County Council: CA 28 Feb 2011

The appellant sisters, both with substantial learing disabilities appealed against a declaration that the arrangements made for their care by the respondent did not amount to a deprivation of their liberty. In either case, they would only be allowed to leave their residence under escort of a competent adult.
Held: The appeals failed.

Judges:

Mummery, Smith, Wilson LJJ

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 190, [2012] PTSR 727, [2011] 2 FLR 583, [2011] Fam Law 475, [2011] MHLR 125, [2011] HRLR 19, [2011] UKHRR 584, [2012] Fam 170, [2012] 2 WLR 1056, [2011] 1 FCR 559, (2011) 14 CCL Rep 209

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 5, Mental Capacity Act 2005

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Salford City Council v GJ, NJ and BJ (Incapacitated adults) FD 16-May-2008
The court considered the place of human rights considerations in local authority decisions regarding the care and placement of incapacitated adults.
Held: The situation should be reviewed at least annually and at shorter intervals as . .

Cited by:

Cited – P (By His Litigation Friend The Official Solicitor) v Cheshire West and Chester Council and Another and similar SC 19-Mar-2014
Deprivation of Liberty
P and Q were two adolescent sisters without capacity. They complained that the arrangements made for their care amounted to an unjustified deprivation of liberty, and now appealed against rejection of their cases. In the second case, P, an adult . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Human Rights

Updated: 03 September 2022; Ref: scu.430079

Daniela Lipkowsky And India Dawn McCormack v Germany: ECHR 18 Jan 2011

Citations:

26755/10, [2011] ECHR 276

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Re E (Children) (Abduction: Custody Appeal) SC 10-Jun-2011
Two children were born in Norway to a British mother (M) and Norwegian father (F). Having lived in Norway, M brought them to England to stay, but without F’s knowledge or consent. M replied to his application for their return that the children would . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Children

Updated: 03 September 2022; Ref: scu.430101

BB, Regina (on The Application of) v Special Immigration Appeals Commission and Another: Admn 25 Feb 2011

The court was asked as to bail proceedings in the context of appeals to the Special Immigration Appeals Commission.

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 336 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Special Immigration Appeals Commission Act 1997

Crime, Human Rights

Updated: 03 September 2022; Ref: scu.430082

Walton Kiddiwinks Private Day Nursery v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 15 Jul 2011

FTTTx Penalty; late filing; fairness; s98A(2)(a) TMA 1970. Common law fairness. Conscionable conduct. Burden of proof. Jusilla v Finland. Article 6 ECHR.

Citations:

[2011] UKFTT 479 (TC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Taxes Management Act 1970 98A(2)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Taxes Management, Human Rights

Updated: 03 September 2022; Ref: scu.449472

London Borough of Hounslow v Powell, Leeds City Council v Hall etc: SC 23 Feb 2011

In each case the tenant occupied the property as his home, but was not a secure tenant of the local authority. The Court was asked whether, in granting a possession order in such a case, the court was obliged to consider the proportionality of the order requested. Powell had been given emergency accomodation as a homeless person, but had accrued substantial arrears. Frisby and Hall were both probationary tenants.
Held: The principle set out in Pinnock applied equally in these cases. In any case where a local authority sought to retake possession of somebody’s home, a court asked to order possession must consider the proportionality of the proposed order, provided that the tenant raises the issue of proportionality and shows that it is seriously arguable. The court must be shown a legitimate aim, including the vindication of the rights as owner, or to enable the authority to manage and fulfil its statutory duties. Save in an unusual case, the authority need not be required to particularise further its reasons.
Section 127(2) assumes the lawfulness of the proposed order, and the issue of proportionality goes as to that lawfulness.

Judges:

Lord Phillips, President, Lord Hope, Deputy President, Lord Rodger, Lord Walker, Lady Hale, Lord Brown, Lord Collins

Citations:

[2011] UKSC 8, UKSC 2010/0086, UKSC 2010/0111, UKSC 2010/0071, [2011] 2 All ER 129, [2011] NPC 24, [2011] 2 WLR 287, [2011] PTSR 512, [2011] HLR 23, [2011] 9 EG 164, [2011] 2 AC 186

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary

Statutes:

Housing Act 1985, European Convention on Human Rights 8, Housing Act 1996 127(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Manchester City Council v Pinnock SC 3-Nov-2010
The tenant had been secure but had his tenancy had been reduced to an insecure demoted tenancy after he was accused of anti-social behaviour. He had not himself been accused of any misbehaviour, but it was said that he should have controlled his . .
Cited – Kay and Another v London Borough of Lambeth and others; Leeds City Council v Price and others and others HL 8-Mar-2006
In each case the local authority sought to recover possession of its own land. In the Lambeth case, they asserted this right as against an overstaying former tenant, and in the Leeds case as against gypsies. In each case the occupiers said that the . .
Cited – Doherty and others v Birmingham City Council HL 30-Jul-2008
The House was asked ‘whether a local authority can obtain a summary order for possession against an occupier of a site which it owns and has been used for many years as a gipsy and travellers’ caravan site. His licence to occupy the site has come to . .
Appeal from – Salford City Council v Mullen CA 30-Mar-2010
The court considered the status of decisions to commence proceedings for possession by local authorities against tenants not protected under any statutory scheme. The tenants, on introductory tenancies and under the homelessness regime, argued that . .
Cited – Paulic v Croatia ECHR 22-Oct-2009
The State re-acquired a former Yugoslavian Army flat and brought a civil action seeking the applicant’s eviction on the basis that he never obtained a specially protected tenancy under domestic law. The Croatian court ordered his eviction.
Cited – Zehentner v Austria ECHR 16-Jul-2009
ECHR The applicant’s apartment was subject to a judicial sale for non-payment of debt. She was ill, and did not participate in the sale. The local law had time limits for challenging a judicial sale, designed to . .
Cited – Cosic v Croatia ECHR 15-Jan-2009
The applicant teacher was provided a flat by her school, which it in had leased from the Yugoslavian Army. That lease expired in 1990. She remained, paying rent to the school. Ultimately the Croatian State, which had assumed ownership of Yugoslavian . .
Cited – McCann v The United Kingdom ECHR 9-Sep-2008
The local authority had determined Mr McCann’s right to remain in his home by obtaining from his wife a notice to quit, the effect of which (surrendering their joint tenancy) upon him she did not understand. He said that this interfered with his . .
Cited – Gillow v The United Kingdom ECHR 24-Nov-1986
The housing authority in Guernsey refused to allow the applicants to occupy the house they owned there.
Held: The house in question was the applicants’ home because, although they had been absent from Guernsey for many years, they had not . .
Cited – Buckley v The United Kingdom ECHR 25-Sep-1996
The Commission had concluded, by a narrow majority, that the measures taken by the respondent in refusing planning permission and enforcing planning orders were excessive and disproportionate, even allowing a margin of appreciation enjoyed by the . .
Cited – Kryvitska And Kryvitskyy v Ukraine ECHR 2-Dec-2010
. .
Cited – London Borough of Harrow v Qazi HL 31-Jul-2003
The applicant had held a joint tenancy of the respondent. His partner gave notice and left, and the property was taken into possession. The claimant claimed restoration of his tenancy saying the order did not respect his right to a private life and . .

Cited by:

Cited – Sims v Dacorum Borough Council CA 24-Jan-2013
Husband and wife had been joint tenants of the council. On the breakdown of the marriage, W gave notice to quit. H defended the council’s possession action, saying that it was an infringement of his human rights for him to lose his tenancy and home. . .
Cited – Sims v Dacorum Borough Council SC 12-Nov-2014
Surrender at Common Law Survives Human Rights Law
The tenants held a secure weekly tenancy of the respondent under a joint tenancy. After a relationship breakdown, Mrs Sims had given notice to quit. Mr Sims, left in possession now argued that the common law rules should not be allowed to deprive . .
Cited – ZH and CN, Regina (on The Applications of) v London Boroughs of Newham and Lewisham SC 12-Nov-2014
The court was asked whether the 1977 Act required a local authorty to obtain a court order before taking possession of interim accommodation it provided to an apparently homeless person while it investigated whether it owed him or her a duty under . .
Cited – Akerman-Livingstone v Aster Communities Ltd SC 11-Mar-2015
Appeal about the proper approach of the courts where the defendant to a claim for possession of his home raises a defence of unlawful discrimination, contrary to the Equality Act 2010, by the claimant landlord. In particular, the issue is whether . .
Cited – McDonald v McDonald and Others SC 15-Jun-2016
Her parents had bought a house and granted tenancies to their adult daughter (the appellant), who suffered a personality disorder. They became unable to repay the mortgage. Receivers were appointed but the appellant fell into arrears with the rent. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Human Rights

Updated: 02 September 2022; Ref: scu.429724

Hachette Filipacchi Associates v France: ECHR 12 Nov 2007

Citations:

71111/01, [2007] ECHR 5567

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – MGN Limited v United Kingdom ECHR 18-Jan-2011
The applicant publisher said that the finding against it of breach of confidence and the system of success fees infringed it Article 10 rights to freedom of speech. It had published an article about a model’s attendance at Narcotics anonymous . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 02 September 2022; Ref: scu.429722

James, Wells And Lee v The United Kingdom: ECHR 20 Dec 2010

Citations:

25119/09, [2010] ECHR 2219

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Cited by:

See Also – James, Wells and Lee v The United Kingdom ECHR 18-Sep-2012
ECHR Article 5-1
Deprivation of liberty
Failure to provide the rehabilitative courses to prisoners which were necessary for their release: violation
Facts – By virtue of section 225 of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 02 September 2022; Ref: scu.429697

Shindler v The United Kingdom: ECHR 20 Dec 2010

Statement of Facts

Citations:

19840/09, [2010] ECHR 2222

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights, Representation of the People Act 1983

Cited by:

Statement of Facts – Shindler v The United Kingdom ECHR 7-May-2013
Article 3 of Protocol No. 1
Vote
Restriction on voting rights of non-resident citizens: no violation
Facts – The applicant, a British national, left the United Kingdom in 1982 following his retirement and moved to Italy with his . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Elections

Updated: 02 September 2022; Ref: scu.429699

Bourgass and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: Admn 18 Feb 2011

The prisoner claimants each challenged the way that decisions had been taken which had led to their being held in segregation units. They said the procedures were unfair.
Held: The applications were dismissed. Article 3 was not engaged.

Judges:

Irwin J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 286 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – King, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice CA 27-Mar-2012
In each case the prisoners challenged their transfer to cellular confinement or segregation within prison or YOI, saying that the transfers infringed their rights under Article 6, saying that domestic law, either in itself or in conjunction with . .
At first Instance – Bourgass and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice SC 29-Jul-2015
The Court considered the procedures when a prisoner is kept in solitary confinement, otherwise described as ‘segregation’ or ‘removal from association’, and principally whether decisions to keep the appellants in segregation for substantial periods . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Prisons, Human Rights

Updated: 02 September 2022; Ref: scu.429678

Gutierrez Suarez v Spain: ECHR 1 Sep 2010

(French Text)

Judges:

Josep Casadevall, P

Citations:

16023/07 French Text, [2010] ECHR 2225

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – MGN Limited v United Kingdom ECHR 18-Jan-2011
The applicant publisher said that the finding against it of breach of confidence and the system of success fees infringed it Article 10 rights to freedom of speech. It had published an article about a model’s attendance at Narcotics anonymous . .
Cited – Seckerson and Times Newspapers Ltd v The United Kingdom ECHR 24-Jan-2012
The first applicant had been chairman of a jury and had expressed his concerns about their behaviour to the second applicant who published them. They were prosecuted under the 1981 Act. They had said that no details of the deliberations had been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Media

Updated: 02 September 2022; Ref: scu.429693

Webster and Others v Ridgeway Foundation School: QBD 5 Feb 2010

The claimant had been severely injured when attacked at school. He was a white youth, and his attackers all Asian. The school had a history of inter-racial tension, and he claimed in negligence, and that they had failed to protect his human right not to be subjected to torture.

Judges:

Nicol J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 157 (QB), [2010] ELR 694

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Webster and Others v The Governors of the Ridgeway Foundation School QBD 21-May-2009
The first claimant had been severely beaten as he left school. He and his parents also claimed post traumatic stress. They alleged that the school had been negligent in having allowed racial tensions to develop. The claimant was white, and his . .
Cited – Todd v Crown Prosecution Service; T v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another; Todd v DPP QBD 6-Oct-2003
The defendant had been under 18 at the commencement of proceedings but attained 18 during them. The newspaper was granted leave to refer to him by name upon his becoming 18.
Held: Denying the appeal. The balance between the freedom of the . .

Cited by:

See Also – Webster and Others v The Ridgeway Foundation School QBD 2-Mar-2010
The court considered whether costs should be payable on a standard or indemnity basis. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Human Rights

Updated: 02 September 2022; Ref: scu.401008

Allen v The United Kingdom: ECHR 2 May 2006

Statement of facts

Citations:

18837/06, [2006] ECHR 1165

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Statement of facts – Allen v The United Kingdom ECHR 30-Mar-2010
The applicant said that the fact that she had not been allowed to attend a bail hearing in person had infringed her article 5-3, 5-4, and 6 rights. She had been arrested and held in custody. The magistrates granted her bail, but she was held in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 02 September 2022; Ref: scu.277234

Othman (Abu Qatada) (Jordan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 9 Apr 2008

The claimant appealed an order for his deportation back to Jordan, saying that if returned there was a real risk that he would face a trial based on evidence obtained by torture.
Held: The appeal succeeded. A foreign national could not be deported under such circumstances since they would breach his right to a fair trial.

Judges:

Sir Anthony Clarke, Master of the Rolls, Lord Justice Buxton and Lady Justice Smith

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 290, [2008] 3 WLR 798, Times 15-Apr-2008, [2008] HRLR 26, [2008] UKHRR 761

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

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 by:

Cited – Al-Saadoon and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Defence Admn 19-Dec-2008
The two applicants had been detained by the armed forces in Iraq suspected of murder. They sought release before being transferred to the civilian authorities for trial saying that the trials would not be fair. The respondent denied that the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Immigration

Updated: 02 September 2022; Ref: scu.266519

O and others (Children); In re O (Children), In re W-R (a Child), In re W (Children): CA 22 Jun 2005

In each case litigants in person had sought to be allowed to have the assistance and services of a Mackenzie friend in children cases. In one case, the court had not allowed confidential documents to be disclosed to the friend.
Held: The courts had been unhelpful to the parties appearing before them. If given access to confidential court documents, a McKenzie friend would be obliged to maintain their confidentiality, and a breach would be a contempt of court. The 2004 Act had relaxed some restrictions on publication of court cases. The Human Rights of the appellant were engaged by this decision. The court was particularly concerned to dispel any suggestion that a McKenzie Friend should not attend a directions hearing. The appeals succeeded.

Judges:

Thorpe, Wall LJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 759, Times 27-Jun-2005, [2006] Fam 1, [2005] 3 WLR 1191

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 2004 62, Administration of Justice Act 1960 12, Children Act 1989 97(2), European Convention on Human Rights 8.1, Family Proceedings Rules 1991 4.23

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – McKenzie v McKenzie CA 10-Jul-1970
Mr McKenzie was a litigant in person who wished to be assisted by a young Australian barrister, gratuitously, in the conduct of his case by sitting beside the husband in Court and prompting him. The hearing was in open Court. The friend’s conduct . .
Cited – In re G (a Child) (Contempt: Committal) CA 10-Apr-2003
The appellant had been made subject to a suspended committal to prison. He was involved with children proceedings, and had published details on the Internet which would make the social worker traceable.
Held: Where a contempt was not committed . .
Cited – Guidance (McKenzie Friends) 2005
Sir Mark Potter gave guidance on the acceptance of McKenzie Friends as advocates: ‘A court may grant an unqualified person a right of audience in exceptional circumstances only and only after careful consideration (D v S (Rights of Audience) [1997] . .
Cited – Representation of Children in Family Proceedings pursuant to FPR 1991 rule 9.5 5-Apr-2004
Guidance was given including the following: ‘A litigant in person wishing to have the help of a McKenzie Friend should be allowed to do so unless the judge is satisfied that fairness and the interests of justice do not so require. The presumption in . .
Cited – In re G (a Child) (Litigants in Person) CA 28-Jul-2003
The father of a child involved in a case before the court was acting in person. He wanted to seek advice from the Citizen’s Advice Bureau or the RCJ Personal Support Unit.
Held: The rules needed to be reconsidered so that a litigant in person . .
Cited – Collier v Hicks 7-Jun-1831
Trespass for assaulting, and turning plaintiff out of a police office. Plea, that two of the defendants, being justices of the peace, were assembled in a police office to adjudicate upon an information against AB for an offence against a penal . .
Cited – Regina v Leicester City Justices, ex parte Barrow CA 1-Aug-1991
The appellant challenged a community charge liability order in which justices had refused an application made on his behalf for a friend to be allowed to sit with him to give advice and assistance. He sought judicial review. The Divisional Court had . .
Cited – In Re H (A Minor) (Chambers Proceedings: Mckenzie Friend) CA 6-May-1997
A father sought ex parte, permission to appeal against orders in the county court. The first had refused to allow him to have a McKenzie friend in an application for contact to his daughter. The Recorder had taken the view that because the . .
Cited – Re G (Chambers Proceedings: McKenzie friend) CA 10-Jul-1991
A proposed McKenzie friend was a solicitor who was to be paid, but did not wish to be on the record. H appealed a refusal to allow him to be present in chambers. The Judge had taken the view that the proceedings were of a highly confidential nature . .
Cited – Re M (Contact: Family Assistance: McKenzie Friend) CA 1999
A father appealed a refual of consent for him to be allowed assistance from a McKenzie Friend.
Held: He should have been allowed assistance on the contact and other applications. It was ‘a matter of regret’ that the father had been denied the . .
Cited – Regina v Bow County Court, Ex Parte Pelling CA 17-Dec-1999
Access to the court given to a McKenzie Friend should normally be given in matters in open court, but when it came to matters being heard in chambers, the judge had discretion as to who he would hear. The right is in any event that of the litigant, . .
Cited – Dombo Beheer BV v The Netherlands ECHR 27-Oct-1993
‘under the principle of equality of arms, as one of the features of the wider concept of a fair trial, each party must be afforded a reasonable opportunity to present his case under conditions that do not place him at a disadvantage vis-a-vis his . .
Cited – Re H (McKenzie Friend: Pre-Trial Determination) CA 2002
The judge had refused a father’s application to be assisted by a McKenzie friend (a Dr Pelling) on the ground that, having listened to and observed the proposed McKenzie friend, he felt that, with the father on his own, the hearing would be fairer, . .
Cited – Yousef v The Netherlands ECHR 5-Nov-2002
In ‘judicial decisions where the rights under article 8 of parents and of a child are at stake, the child’s rights must be the paramount consideration.’ . .
Cited – Kent County Council v The Mother, The Father, B (By Her Children’s Guardian); Re B (A Child) (Disclosure) FD 19-Mar-2004
The council had taken the applicant’s children into care alleging that the mother had harmed them. In the light of the subsequent cases casting doubt on such findings, the mother sought the return of her children. She applied now that the hearings . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Litigation Practice, Human Rights

Updated: 02 September 2022; Ref: scu.227088

Regina v M (Witness Statement): CACD 20 Feb 2003

The defendant appealed his conviction for murder. The principal witness’ statement had been allowed to be read to the jury after the witness had claimed to be afraid of giving evidence.
Held: There was no general principle which would operate against admitting evidence in this way. Luca did not establish a rule to which there would be no exceptions. Such a result would make the sections unusable and only encourage criminals to frighten witnesses. In this case the judge’s discretion was not supportable because of the defendant’s own disability, and the witness had potential flaws.

Judges:

Potter LJ, Mackay, Mellor JJ

Citations:

Times 02-May-2003

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1988 823(3), European Convention on Human Rights 6.3(d)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Luca v Italy ECHR 27-Feb-2001
The accused had been convicted. After exercising his right to silence, there were read to the court accounts of statements made by co-accused but without an opportunity for him to cross examine the witnesses.
Held: Saunders had established the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence, Human Rights

Updated: 02 September 2022; Ref: scu.181829

Regina v Field (Brian John); Regina v Young (Alfred): CACD 12 Dec 2002

Each applicant having been convicted of indecent assaults involving children, now appealed an order banning them from working with children.
Held: The orders were not penalties within article 7. The order was available in the absence of a conviction, and it was intended as a preventive measure rather than a punitive one. The section could also apply to behaviour which had occurred prior to its commencement. The mere fact that a statute depends for its application in the future on events that have happened in the past does not offend against the presumption. The Court accepted a submission by the Secretary of State for the Home Department that the court should take a more relaxed approach to a potentially retroactive element in legislation where its intended purpose was, as it clearly was to protect children.

Judges:

Kay LJ, Grigson, Ouseley JJ

Citations:

Times 16-Jan-2003, [2002] EWCA Crim 2913, [2003] 1 WLR 882

Statutes:

Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000 28, European Convention on Human Rights 7

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Welch v United Kingdom ECHR 15-Feb-1995
The applicant was convicted in 1988 of drug offences committed in 1986. The judge passed a sentence of imprisonment but imposed a confiscation order pursuant to an Act that came into force in l987.
Held: The concept of penalty in Article 7 was . .

Cited by:

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 lender of its . .
Cited – Regina v R (Sentencing: Extended licences) CACD 25-Jul-2003
The imposition of an extended period of licence in respect of offences committed before 1992 did not infringe the defendant’s human rights. The defendant had been convicted of offences from 1976 and 1982. The commencement date for the 1991 Act was 1 . .
Cited – R, Regina (on the Application of) v Durham Constabulary and Another HL 17-Mar-2005
The appellant, a boy aged 15, had been warned as to admitted indecent assaults on girls. He complained that it had not been explained to him that the result would be that his name would be placed on the sex offenders register. The Chief Constable . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 02 September 2022; Ref: scu.178767

Regina (IH) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another: CA 15 May 2002

The applicant was a restricted mental patient. His conditional release had been ordered, but required a consultant psychiatrist to be found who would agree to supervise him. None such could be found, and his detention continued. After two years he contended that his continued detention infringed his human rights.
Held: Campbell’s case required s73 to operate in two stages. The decision was made for a release, subject to conditions. The second stage was met once those arrangements were in place, and at that point the conditional release was ordered. Article 5.4 required a speedy decision, and there was a clear potential conflict. To avoid that conflict Campbell might no longer be followed. Instead, a provisional decision directing a conditional discharge should be made, but that direction should be deferred to allow for arrangements for psychiatric treatment in the community. The health authority was under a duty to provide assistance. If no such help was forthcoming, the tribunal might then be obliged to decide to continue the detention. That would avoid incompatibility.

Judges:

Lord Justice Jonathan Parker

Citations:

Times 24-May-2002, Gazette 20-Jun-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 646, [2003] QB 320, [2002] 3 WLR 967

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983 73 117, European Convention on Human Rights 3 5.4

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

No longer compliant – Regina v Oxford Regional Mental Health Review Tribunal, Ex parte Secretary of State for the Home Department (Campbell’s Case) HL 1988
The House decided that section 73 of the 1983 Act provided a two-stage process in relation to a patient’s conditional discharge. The tribunal first decides that it will direct the discharge subject to conditions, but defers giving the direction so . .
Cited – Johnson v The United Kingdom ECHR 24-Oct-1997
Mr Johnson awaited trial for crimes of violence. He was diagnosed mentally ill, and on conviction made subject to a hospital order, and restricted without limit of time. He made progress, but was not discharged or re-classified. At a fourth tribunal . .
Appeal from – Regina (on the Application IH) v Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust and Others Admn 5-Dec-2001
Whether the 1983 Act, and in particular its provisions governing the conditional discharge and deferral of conditional discharge of ‘restricted patients’, are compatible with Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina (C) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 15-May-2002
A mental health review tribunal had recommended the conditional release of the applicant, a restricted patient in a high security hospital. A community social worker’s report was only later made available to the tribunal.
Held: There was no . .
Cited – Farnell, Regina (on Application By) v Criminal Cases Review Commission Admn 15-Apr-2003
The appellant sought judicial review of the respondents refusal to refer his case back to the Court of Appeal.
Held: The Commission had misunderstood the way in which the Court of Appeal worked, by anticipating that it would reconsider the . .
Appeal from – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another ex parte IH HL 13-Nov-2003
The appellant had been found unfit to plead after assaulting his son, and he had been detained under the 1964 Act. He alleged his detention was in breach of his right to a fair trial. His release had been authorised subject to the appointment of a . .
Appealed to – Regina (on the Application IH) v Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust and Others Admn 5-Dec-2001
Whether the 1983 Act, and in particular its provisions governing the conditional discharge and deferral of conditional discharge of ‘restricted patients’, are compatible with Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights. . .
Cited – Regina (W) v Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Admn 13-Feb-2003
The claimant sought damages for false imprisonment. The mental health tribunal had ordered his release, but the respondent had delayed that release.
Held: False imprisonment is established on proof of imprisonment without lawful authority. An . .
Cited – Regina (C) v Mental Health Review Tribunal and Others QBD 17-Jan-2005
C applied for judicial review of the refusal by the respondent to order his absolute discharge, and the continuation of the restriction order. He said the tribunal had taken account of earlier reporst referring to a psychopathic personality . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Human Rights

Updated: 02 September 2022; Ref: scu.170307

The Police Complaints Authority and Others v Regina: CA 26 Mar 2002

Simon Brown LJ said: ‘Given the PCA’s right under section 76(7)(b) to such other information as they need for the purpose of reaching their section 76 decision, I am inclined to think that, if, after obtaining the complainant’s comments upon any other witnesses’ statements disclosed to him, they thought it necessary, they could require the investigation to be re-opened.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Simon Brown

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 389, [2002] UKHRR 985

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Police Act 1996 76(7)(b) 80(1)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina (Green) v Police Complaints Authority and Others QBD 21-Dec-2001
The applicant complained about a breach of his human rights by police behaviour and sought to inspect statements made by eye witnesses to the incidents complained of. The Police Complaints Authority replied that it was necessary for their function . .

Cited by:

Appeal From – Regina v Police Complaints Authority ex parte Green HL 26-Feb-2004
Discovery was sought of statements created during the investigation of a complaint against a police officer. The claimant argued that a police officer had deliberately driven his car at him.
Held: The investigation by a separate police force . .
Cited – The Independent Police Complaints Commission, Regina (On the Application of) v Commissioner Of Police Of the Metropolis Admn 3-Jul-2009
Delay defeated Request for review
A police dog had bitten a child on his arrest. His mother complained and again at the handling of her complaint by the IPCC. The MPS had disciplined in accordance with a letter from the IPCC, and having acted refused to re-open the complaint.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Human Rights, Litigation Practice

Updated: 02 September 2022; Ref: scu.170158

Huseyin Habip Taskin v Turkey: ECHR 1 Feb 2011

The applicant complained that he had been denied the assistance of a lawyer during his police custody and that his police statement which had been taken in the absence of a lawyer had been used in his conviction by the trial court.

Judges:

Francoise Tulkens, President

Citations:

5289/06, [2011] ECHR 159

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6.1 6.3(c)

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Ambrose v Harris, Procurator Fiscal, Oban, etc SC 6-Oct-2011
(Scotland) The appellant had variously been convicted in reliance on evidence gathered at different stages before arrest, but in each case without being informed of any right to see a solicitor. The court was asked, as a devolution issue, at what . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 01 September 2022; Ref: scu.428394

MSS v Belgium And Greece: ECHR 21 Jan 2011

Grand Chamber – The applicant alleged that his expulsion by the Belgian authorities had violated Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention and that he had been subjected in Greece to treatment prohibited by Article 3; he also complained of the lack of a remedy under Article 13 of the Convention that would enable him to have his complaints examined. ECtHR noted UNHCR’s claim (in a letter to the Belgian government in April 2009) that the Fourth Section in KRS had apparently overlooked some of the criticisms that it had made of Greece. No reference had been made to whether conditions of reception conformed to regional and international standards of human rights protection or whether asylum seekers had access to fair consideration of their asylum applications or if they were able to exercise their rights under the Geneva Convention. The Grand Chamber reviewed the numerous reports and materials that had been generated about the situation in Greece since the KRS decision. It observed that these all agreed about the deficiencies of the asylum procedure in Greece. The court therefore concluded that the situation in Greece was known to the Belgian authorities; that seeking assurances from the Greek government that the applicant faced no risk of treatment contrary to ECHR was not sufficient to ensure adequate protection against the risk where reliable sources had reported practices that were tolerated by the authorities and which were manifestly contrary to the principles of the Convention; and that the Aliens Office of the Belgian government ‘systematically applied the Dublin Regulation . . without so much as considering the possibility of making an exception’
Held: There had been a violation by Belgium of article 3 of EHCR because by sending the applicant back to Greece, the Belgian authorities exposed him to detention and living conditions there which were in breach of that article.

Judges:

Jean-Paul Costa, P

Citations:

30696/09, [2011] ECHR 108, [2011] ECHR 748, 31 BHRC 313, [2011] INLR 533, (2011) 53 EHRR 2

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 3

Cited by:

Cited – EM (Eritrea), Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 19-Feb-2014
SSHD must examine safety of country for return
The Court was asked: ‘Is an asylum seeker or refugee who resists his or her return from the United Kingdom to Italy (the country in which she or he first sought or was granted asylum) required to establish that there are in Italy ‘systemic . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Immigration

Updated: 01 September 2022; Ref: scu.428267

Clift v Slough Borough Council: CA 21 Dec 2010

The court was asked how, if at all, the Human Rights Act 1998 has affected a local authority’s defence of qualified privilege in defamation cases. The claimant had been placed on the Council’s Violent Persons Register after becoming very upset and angry with several council officials and expressing it. The Council had defended the consequent defamation action pleading qualified priviege and justification. The claimant had argued that the defence of qualified privilege could not now be used by a Council, since as a public authority it was bound to act in accordance with her human Rights. The Council now appealed against a ruling that ‘the Council does not have a qualified privilege defence (1) in relation to publication to their employees in Licensing, Food and Safety and Children and Education Services who, although they were ‘customer facing staff’, were not likely to be approached by the claimant and (2) also in relation to Community Wardens, Trade Union Officials and anyone in the four Partner Organisations.’
Held: Where the publisher is a public authority, in order to be protected by qualified privilege the publication must be consistent with its public law duties and in accordance with its obligations under the Human Rights Act.

Judges:

Ward, Thomas, Richards LJJ

Citations:

[2011] 3 All ER 118, [2011] EMLR 271, [2011] 1 WLR 1774, [2010] All ER (D) 243, [2010] EWCA Civ 1484, [2011] PTSR 990

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Human Rights Act 1998

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Adam v Ward HL 1917
The plaintiff, Major Adam MP, falsely attacked General Scobell in a speech in the House of Commons, thus bringing his charge into the national arena. The Army Council investigated the charge, rejected it and directed their secretary, Sir E Ward, the . .
Cited – Kearns and Others v The General Council of the Bar CA 17-Mar-2003
The claimants had sought to recover from the General Council of the Bar damages for libel in a communication from the head of the Bar Council’s Professional Standards and Legal Services Department to all heads of chambers, their senior clerks and . .
Cited – Toogood v Spyring 1834
Qualified Privilege of Bona Fide Words Under Duty
The defence of qualified privilege arises where the statement in question was bona fide and without malicious intent to injure: ‘In general, an action lies for the malicious publication of statements which are false in fact, and injurious to the . .
Cited – Regina (X) v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police CA 30-Jul-2004
The claimant had been accused of offences, but the prosecution had been discontinued when the child victims had failed to identify him. The police had nevertheless notified potential employers and he had been unable to obtain work as a social . .
Cited – Clift v Slough Borough Council and Another QBD 6-Jul-2009
The claimant sought damages for defamation. The council had decided that she had threatened a member of staff and notified various people, and entered her name on a violent persons register. She alleged malice, the council pleaded justification and . .
Cited – W v Westminster City Council and Others QBD 9-Dec-2004
The claimant sought to bring an action for defamation based upon communications made in a child protection conference. The reference was in a Report for Conference to be held pursuant to the duties imposed on local authorities by the Children Act . .
Cited – Wood v Chief Constable West Midlands Police CA 8-Dec-2004
The claimant was a director of a limited company. A Detective Chief Inspector with responsibility for crime prevention was investigating a series of car thefts and arrested the claimant’s business partner and, before the accused had even stood his . .

Cited by:

Cited – Lewis v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis and Others (Rev 1) QBD 31-Mar-2011
The defendant sought a ruling on the meaning of the words but using section 69(4) of the 1981 Act. The claimant solicitor was acting in complaints as to the unlawful interception of celebrity voicemails by agents of the press. There had been debate . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation, Human Rights

Updated: 01 September 2022; Ref: scu.428237

Bader and Others v Sweden: ECHR 15 Sep 2010

Execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights

Citations:

13284/04, [2010] ECHR 1450

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Citing:

See Also – Bader and Others v Sweden ECHR 8-Nov-2005
ECHR Judgment (Merits) – Violation of Art. 2; Violation of Art. 3. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 01 September 2022; Ref: scu.643083

ZM v AM: FD 26 Jun 2014

‘A very young wife was lawfully brought to the United Kingdom, where she was dependent upon her husband and his family, and where she gave birth to a child who has major disabilities. Her husband made little effort to secure for her the immigration status to which she was entitled and when the marriage got into difficulties, she was then sent out of the country with no right to re-enter. The result is that she and her child have been separated for the past three years, a situation that is a wholesale breach of their right to respect for their family life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The only way in which this breach can be remedied is by the mother regaining the ability to enter this country. The nature of the child’s condition means that while his mother remains abroad there is no opportunity for any meaningful relationship between them.’

Judges:

Mr Justice Peter Jackson

Citations:

[2014] EWHC 2110 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Family, Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 31 August 2022; Ref: scu.534359

Donohoe v Ireland (Legal Summary): ECHR 12 Dec 2013

Article 6
Criminal proceedings
Article 6-1
Fair hearing
Admission in evidence against person accused of membership of unlawful organisation of police testimony based on undisclosed sources: no violation
Facts – The case concerned the fairness of the applicant’s trial and conviction before the Special Criminal Court in Ireland for being a member of the IRA. His conviction was based, among other things, on the sworn testimony of a police chief superintendent, who testified in reliance on confidential information available to him from police and civilian sources that it was his belief that the applicant was a member of the IRA. When asked to identify the sources of his belief, the chief superintendent refused, claiming privilege on the grounds that disclosure would endanger lives and State security. The Special Criminal Court directed the chief superintendent to produce all relevant documentary sources forming the basis of his belief which it then reviewed in order to be satisfied as to the reliability of his belief. Neither the prosecution nor the defence had access to that confidential material. In his application to the European Court, the applicant complained that the non-disclosure had made his trial unfair as it seriously restricted his defence rights.
Law – Article 6 – 1: In accordance with the general principles articulated in Al-Khawaja and Tahery v. the United Kingdom, three questions had to be addressed: whether it was necessary to uphold the claim of privilege, whether the undisclosed evidence was the sole or decisive basis for the conviction and whether there were sufficient counterbalancing factors, including the existence of strong procedural safeguards, in place to ensure that the proceedings, when judged in their entirety, were fair.
On the first, the Court found that the justifications given for the grant of privilege – the effective protection of State security and of informers in danger of reprisals from the IRA, and the effective prosecution of serious and complex crime – were compelling and substantiated, so that the decision not to disclose the sources had therefore been necessary. As to the second, the undisclosed evidence was not the sole or decisive basis for the conviction, as the trial court had heard over fifty other prosecution witnesses and there had been ‘significant’ other corroborative material before it.
As to whether sufficient safeguards had been in place to counterbalance the disadvantage the grant of privilege had caused the defence, the trial court had adopted a number of measures: it had reviewed the documentary material upon which the chief superintendent’s sources were based in order to assess the adequacy and reliability of his belief that the applicant was a member of the IRA; it had explored whether the non-disclosed material was relevant or likely to be relevant to the defence and had been attentive to the requirements of fairness when weighing the public interest in concealment against the interest of the accused in disclosure; and, lastly, when deciding on the weight to be attached to the chief superintendent’s evidence it had expressly excluded from its consideration any information obtained through its review of the documentary material and had confirmed that it would not convict the applicant on the basis of the chief superintendent’s evidence alone.
In addition to those measures taken by the trial court, the laws allowing the admission of ‘belief’ evidence ensured that it could only be provided by high-ranking police officers, that it would be assessed by the court as a belief or opinion rather than as conclusive factual evidence, and that the defence could still cross-examine the chief superintendent in a range of ways – such as by asking the nature of his sources, whether he knew or had personally dealt with any of the informants and what was his experience in such intelligence gathering – in order to test his demeanour and credibility.
Overall, therefore, and bearing in mind that the Court’s task was to ascertain whether the proceedings in their entirety were fair, the weight of the evidence other than the belief evidence, combined with the counterbalancing safeguards and factors, had to be considered sufficient to conclude that the grant of privilege as regards the sources of the chief superintendent’s belief had not rendered the applicant’s trial unfair.
Conclusion: no violation (unanimously).

Citations:

19165/08 – Legal Summary, [2013] ECHR 1363

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Summary – Donohoe v Ireland (Chamber Judgment) ECHR 12-Dec-2013
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 31 August 2022; Ref: scu.519693

Donohoe v Ireland (Chamber Judgment): ECHR 12 Dec 2013

Citations:

19165/08 – Chamber Judgment, [2013] ECHR 1276

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Citing:

Summary – Donohoe v Ireland (Legal Summary) ECHR 12-Dec-2013
Article 6
Criminal proceedings
Article 6-1
Fair hearing
Admission in evidence against person accused of membership of unlawful organisation of police testimony based on undisclosed sources: no violation
Facts – The case . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 31 August 2022; Ref: scu.518951