Category: Human Rights

Bok v The Netherlands: ECHR 18 Jan 2011

Citations:

45482/06, [2011] ECHR 54

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Adams, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice SC 11-May-2011
The three claimants had each been convicted of murders and served time. Their convictions had been reversed eventually, and they now appealed against the refusal of compensation for imprisonment, saying that there had been a miscarriage of justice. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 31 August 2022; Ref: scu.428088

Windsor v United Kingdom: ECHR 14 Dec 1988

The claimant complained that whilst arrested, he had been denied access to a lawyer.

Citations:

13081/87, [1988] ECHR 29

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Cadder v Her Majesty’s Advocate SC 26-Oct-2010
Statement without lawyer access was inadmissible
The accused complained that he had been convicted for assault and breach of the peace on the basis of a statement made by him during an interview with the police where, under the 1995 Act, he had been denied access to a lawyer.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Police

Updated: 31 August 2022; Ref: scu.427793

Mousa, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Defence and Another: Admn 21 Dec 2010

Application for judicial review of the Secretary of State’s refusal to order an immediate public inquiry into allegations that persons detained in Iraq at various times between 2003 and 2008 were ill-treated in breach of article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights by members of the British Armed Forces.
Held: Judicial review was refused. Anticipating that anoter inquiry was to look at related issues, it was not unlwaful for the Secretary of State to await the outcome of that inquiry before deciding on a public inquiry. The ‘wait and see’ approach was legally permissible. ‘The core fact-finding exercise already under way through IHAT is liable to impact on the systemic issues’; that the Baha Mousa and Al-Sweady Inquiries overlap with the issues in the present case; that civil claims may provide further answers; and that the ‘very heavy resource implications’ merit ‘real weight’.

Judges:

Richards LJ, Silber J

Citations:

[2011] ACD 32, [2011] UKHRR 268, [2010] EWHC 3304 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Appeal from – Mousa, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Defence and Another CA 22-Nov-2011
The claimant sought a public inquiry into allegations of systematic ill treatment by UK soldiers in Iraq. He now appealed against refusal of an inquiry, the court having found it permissible for the Secretary of Styate to await the outcome of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Armed Forces, Administrative

Updated: 31 August 2022; Ref: scu.427397

Legal Services Commission v Humberstone, Regina (On The Application of): CA 21 Dec 2010

Appeal against successful judicial review of refusal of legal aid for mother of deceased at inquest.
Held: ‘article 2 will be engaged in the much narrower range of cases where there is at least an arguable case that the state has been in breach of its substantive duty to protect life; in such cases the obligation is proactively to initiate a thorough investigation into the circumstances of the death.’

Judges:

Maurice Kay VP CA, Smith, Leveson LJJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 1479, [2011] 1 WLR 1460, (2011) 118 BMLR 79, [2010] Inquest LR 221, [2011] Med LR 56, [2011] HRLR 12, [2011] ACD 51, [2011] UKHRR 8

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Access to Justice Act 1999 6, European Convention on Human Rights 82

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Humberstone, Regina (on The Application of) v Legal Services Commission Admn 13-Apr-2010
The claimant sought judicial review of the decision of the Defendant not to recommend that her application for public funding for representation at the inquest enquiring into the death of her son be granted. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Letts, Regina (on The Application of) v The Lord Chancellor and Another Admn 20-Feb-2015
Application for judicial review concerning the criteria applied by the Legal Aid Agency to determine whether relatives of a deceased should be granted legal aid for representation at an inquest into a death which has arisen in circumstances which . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Aid, Coroners, Human Rights

Updated: 31 August 2022; Ref: scu.427369

Wray, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: Admn 16 Dec 2010

Application for judicial review against the decision of the Defendant to refuse to treat a series of submissions by the Claimant that he should not be removed from the UK because such removal would infringe his Article 8 ECHR rights as a fresh claim under paragraph 353 Immigration Rules HC395.

Judges:

Bidder QC J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 3301 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 31 August 2022; Ref: scu.427285

Milanovic v Serbia: ECHR 14 Dec 2010

Citations:

44614/07, [2010] ECHR 2029

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis v DSD and Another SC 21-Feb-2018
Two claimants had each been sexually assaulted by a later notorious, multiple rapist. Each had made complaints to police about their assaults but said that no effective steps had been taken to investigate the serious complaints.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.427258

Chester v Secretary of State for Justice and Wakefield Metropolitan District Council: CA 17 Dec 2010

The prisoner claimant appealed against refusal of his request for judicial review of his disenfranchisement whilst a prisoner.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. It was not possible to read into the Act as suggested a duty on a judge on sentencing

Judges:

Lord Neuberger MR, Laws LJ, Carnwath LJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 1439, [2011] UKHRR 53, [2011] ACD 30, [2011] 1 WLR 1436, [2011] UKHRR 53

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Representation of the People Act 1983 3(1), European Parliamentary Elections Act 2002 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Chester, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and Another Admn 28-Oct-2009
Burton J dismissed a claim for judicial review brought by the serving prisoner, to challenge his statutory disfranchisement from voting in domestic and European Parliamentary elections. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Tovey and Others v Ministry of Justice QBD 18-Feb-2011
The claimants, serving prisoners, sought damages saying that the refusal to allow them to vote was in infringement of their human rights. The large numbers of claims had been consolidated in London. The claimant sought to withdraw his claim.
Appeal from – Chester, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice SC 16-Oct-2013
The two applicants were serving life sentences for murder. Each sought damages for the unlawful withdrawal of their rights to vote in elections, and the failure of the British parliament to take steps to comply with the judgment.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Prisons, Human Rights, Constitutional, Elections

Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.427268

J v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 24 May 2005

The applicant, a Tamil threatened to commit suicide if returned to Sri Lanka. It had been accepted by the Home Secretary that he suffered from post traumatic stress disorder and depression. The medical evidence was that ‘His prognosis (was) presently extremely uncertain . . he had attempted suicide. Though the shock of being refused asylum had been a precipitant, the significant predisposing factors relate to his traumatic experiences. These had then led to his depressive illness the onset of which could be established to the period when he was detained by the Sri Lankan army . . He continues to present with a risk of suicide. This could be aggravated if he had to return to Sri Lanka. Such risk would be high as a result of his knowing that the Home Office would return him to Sri Lanka.’ and ‘if [J] is sent back to Sri Lanka the risk of exacerbating his existing suicidal ideation is greatly increased because he is likely to have lost all hope. Hopelessness has a serious, significant association with completed suicide. In my opinion, if he does not manage to kill himself in the UK there is a high risk that he would try to commit suicide en route and may therefore pose a threat to other passengers in his desperation to kill himself.
If he is prevented from killing himself either in the UK or while being returned I think it is likely that he would commit suicide upon his arrival in Sri Lanka to avoid falling into the hands of the authorities from whom he perceives he is in mortal danger.’
Held: The claim under Article 3 failed. When deciding whether there was a real risk of a breach of article 3 in a suicide case, a question of importance was whether the fear of ill-treatment upon which the suicide was said to be based, was objectively well founded.

Judges:

Brooke VP, Dyson, Lloyd LJJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 629, [2005] Imm AR 409

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Y (Sri Lanka) and Another v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 29-Apr-2009
The applicants appealed against orders for them to be returned to Sri Lanka where they would be subject to arrest and where there were uncontested findings that they had already been tortured and raped whilst in official custody before fleeing Sri . .
Cited – McKinnon, Regina (On the Application of) v Secretary Of State for Home Affairs Admn 31-Jul-2009
Assurances for Extradition
Extradition of the defendant was sought to the US to face allegations of hacking into defence computers there. He said this would infringe his article 3 rights, saying that he suffered Autism Spectrum Disorder.
Held: The application failed. US . .
Cited – AN (Pakistan) v Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 6-Jul-2010
The claimant appealed against refusal of indefinite leave to remain. She said that she feared if she returned to Pakistan she would be subject to domestic violence. Though her husband had received prison sentences of three years for offences of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.225264

Mihailov v Bulgaria: ECHR 21 Jul 2005

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 6-1; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses award – Convention proceedings.

Citations:

52367/99, [2005] ECHR 519, [2009] ECHR 1689

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – A, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Croydon SC 26-Nov-2009
The applicants sought asylum, and, saying that they were children under eighteen, sought also the assistance of the local authority. Social workers judged them to be over eighteen and assistance was declined.
Held: The claimants’ appeals . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.229821

Saleem v Secretary of State for Home Department: CA 13 Jun 2000

A rule which deemed service on an asylum applicant two days after postage of a special adjudicator’s determination irrespective of whether it was in fact received was outside the powers given to the Secretary, and is of no effect. The Act gave power to make rules, but the receipt of the determination was fundamental to the exercise of the rights under the Act. ‘There is an analogy here with the principles established under Article 6 of the ECHR. Immigration and asylum cases have not been held by the ECHR to be ‘the determination of his civil rights and obligations’ for the purpose of Article 6. Furthermore, Article 6 does not guarantee a right of appeal. But if the State establishes such a right it must ensure that people within its jurisdiction enjoy the fundamental guarantees in Article 6′. The right of appeal to an independent appellate body was a fundamental or basic right akin to the right of unimpeded access to a court, an infringement of which must be either expressly authorised by or arise by necessary implication from an Act of Parliament.

Judges:

Lord Justice Roch, Lord Justice Mummery and Lady Justice Hale

Citations:

Times 22-Jun-2000, [2000] EWCA Civ 186, [2001] 1 WLR 443

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Immigration Act 1971, Asylum Appeals (Procedure) Rules 1996 2070, European Convention on Human Rights 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina (G) v Immigration Appeal Tribunal; Regina (M) v Immigration Appeal Tribunal Admn 25-Mar-2004
The applicants sought judicial review of the Immigration Appeal Tribunal’s refusal of leave to appeal. The court had to decide whether such a right survived section 101 of the 2001 Act.
Held: The right to have a judicial review could only be . .
Cited – A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, Mahmoud Abu Rideh Jamal Ajouaou v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 11-Aug-2004
The claimants had each been detained without trial for more than two years, being held as suspected terrorists. They were free leave to return to their own countries, but they feared for their lives if returned. They complained that the evidence . .
Cited – BA (Nigeria) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Others SC 26-Nov-2009
The court was asked whether the expression ‘an asylum claim, or a human rights claim’ in section 92(4)(a) of the 2002 Act includes any second or subsequent claim that the asylum seeker may make, or only a second or subsequent claim which has been . .
Cited – Jones and Others v The Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis Admn 6-Nov-2019
Distributed Demonstration not within 1986 Act
The claimants, seeking to demonstrate support for the extinction rebellion movement by demonstrating in London, now challenged an order made under the 1986 Act restricting their right to demonstrate.
Held: The XRAU was not a public assembly at . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Judicial Review, Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.147219

Mehdi Tanrikulu v Turkey (No 5 2): ECHR 19 Jan 2021

ECHR Judgment : Right to liberty and security : Second Section

Citations:

33374/10, [2021] ECHR 44

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Citing:

See Also – Mehdi Tanrikulu v Turkey ECHR 5-May-2020
ECHR Judgment : Freedom of expression-{general} : Second Section . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.657440

Mehdi Tanrikulu v Turkey: ECHR 5 May 2020

ECHR Judgment : Freedom of expression-{general} : Second Section

Citations:

9735/12, [2020] ECHR 303

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

See Also – Mehdi Tanrikulu v Turkey (No 5 2) ECHR 19-Jan-2021
ECHR Judgment : Right to liberty and security : Second Section . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 29 August 2022; Ref: scu.651026

Faulkner, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice The Parole Board: CA 14 Dec 2010

The claimant sought damages saying that his detention in prison beyond the minimum period pending a review was unlawful when that review was delayed. He now appealed against dismissal of his claim when he had not appeared at court, being unlawfully at large.
Held: The appeal was allowed: ‘(1) Mr Faulkner had suffered a breach of article 5(4) lasting for a period of 10 months, between March 2008 and January 2009, due to unjustified delays on the part of the Ministry of Justice. There had not been any unjustified delay by the Board in setting the hearing date, once all the reports were available.
(2) There was no reason in this case to award damages for a breach of article 5(4) on the basis of a loss of a real chance of earlier release. Rather, it was necessary for Mr Faulkner to show that he would have been released earlier if the breach had not occurred.
(3) Mr Faulkner had shown on the balance of probabilities that he would have been released if the review had taken place in about March 2008.
(4) As a result of the breach of article 5(4), Mr Faulkner had spent some 10 months in prison when he ought not to have done.’
The question of damages was reseerved.

Judges:

Hooper, Sedley, Wilson LJJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 1434

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 5.4

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Faulkner, Regina (On the Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and Another Admn 5-Jun-2009
The claimant had sought to challenge his continued detention in prison when his situation should have been reviewed but had not been. As a lifer he had served the time set in his tariff.
Held: The applicant was unlawfully at large and had not . .

Cited by:

Main Appeal – Faulkner, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice The Parole Board CA 29-Mar-2011
The court considered the approriate level of damages where the claimant’s detention had been wrongly extended through a failure to hold a timely review of his continued detention.
Held: A sum of andpound;10,000 was awarded. The court should . .
Main Appeal (Faulkner) – Faulkner, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and Another SC 1-May-2013
The applicants had each been given a life sentence, but having served the minimum term had been due to have the continued detention reviewed to establish whether or not continued detention was necessary for the protection of the pblic. It had not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Prisons, Human Rights

Updated: 28 August 2022; Ref: scu.427173

Al Hassan-Daniel and Another v HM Revenue and Customs and Another: CA 15 Dec 2010

Suspected of having ingested bags of cocaine, the deceased had been arrested on arrival at the airport. He refused all liquids and foods, but after a week, he died of acute cocaine poisoning. His wife sought damages alleging human rights infringement, and the defendant sought to strike out the claim under ex turpi causa non oritur actio. His family appealed direct from the county court.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The defence of ex turpi causs could not be applied in a human rights case.

Judges:

Lord Neuberger MR, Maurice Kay VP, Sedley LLJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 1443, [2011] HRLR 9, [2011] 2 WLR 488, [2011] 2 All ER 31, [2011] UKHRR 1

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Human Rights, Torts – Other, Crime

Updated: 28 August 2022; Ref: scu.427168

Osborn and Another v The Parole Board: CA 15 Dec 2010

The three claimants complained that the respondent had made decisions adverse to them as to their release to or recall from parole.
Held: Review was refused. While there was ‘some force in the submission that, contrary to the understanding of the judge, there were significant factual disputes on matters relevant to the decision’. He considered however that the judge ‘was right to consider that the board’s decision on release did not ultimately depend on resolution of these issues’. The lack of information about the appellant’s current mental health status and the recommendation that a full psychiatric assessment should be carried out, combined with the very high risk of harm should he re-offend, provided ample reason for not allowing release

Judges:

Sedley, Carnwath, Moses LJJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 1409, [2011] UKHRR 35

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Waite v The United Kingdom ECHR 10-Dec-2002
The claimant had been sentenced to be detained at Her Majesty’s pleasure when a youth. After release on licence, the Parole Board met and revoked that licence without an oral hearing, and in contravention of the rules. He did not dispute the facts . .
Cited – Regina v Parole Board ex parte Smith, Regina v Parole Board ex parte West (Conjoined Appeals) HL 27-Jan-2005
Each defendant challenged the way he had been treated on revocation of his parole licence, saying he should have been given the opportunity to make oral representations.
Held: The prisoners’ appeals were allowed.
Lord Bingham stated: . .
Appeal from – Osborn v The Parole Board Admn 19-Mar-2010
The claimants complained that decisions had been made by the respondents without them having been first given a right to an oral hearing. They now sought permission to bring judicial review.
Held: Permission was refused. The facts in the . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Osborn v The Parole Board SC 9-Oct-2013
Three prisoners raised questions as to the circumstances in which the Parole Board is required to hold an oral hearing before making an adverse decision. One of the appeals (Osborn) concerned a determinate sentence prisoner who was released on . .
Applied – Reilly, Re Judicial Review CANI 6-Apr-2011
The applicant had been granted judicial review of a decision by the parole board not to grant his release on parole but without having afforded him an oral hearing. The Board now appealed.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The court followed the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Prisons, Human Rights

Updated: 28 August 2022; Ref: scu.427177

Secretary of State for The Home Department v DD (Afghanistan): CA 10 Dec 2010

The claimant appealed against rejection of his claim for asylum and protection on human rights grounds. He said that if returned to Afghanistan he would face a real risk of serious harm.

Judges:

Pill, Rimer, Black LJJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 1407

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (1951), Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006 54, European Convention on Human Rights 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Al-Sirri v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 21-Nov-2012
The appellants had been refused refugee status on the ground that they were suspected of having been guilty of terrorist acts. They said that the definition of terrorism applied within the UK was wider than that in the Convention which contained the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 28 August 2022; Ref: scu.427003

Jakobski v Poland: ECHR 7 Dec 2010

The claimant, serving a long jail sentence, said that as a Buddhist, he needed a meat free diet. This was granted at first for medical reasons, but then withdrawn. All attempts failed, and he was mistreated by prison guards. The prison service denied any obligation to provide a diet special to his religious beliefs.
Held: ‘despite the margin of appreciation left to the respondent State, the Court finds that the authorities failed to strike a fair balance between the interests of the prison authorities and those of the applicant, namely the right to manifest his religion through observance of the rules of the Buddhist religion.’

Judges:

Nicolas Bratza, P

Citations:

18429/06, [2010] ECHR 1974, [2011] Eq LR 197, 30 BHRC 417, (2012) 55 EHRR 8

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights, European Prison Rules

Cited by:

Cited – Kevin Fox v United Kingdom ECHR 20-Mar-2012
The claimant said that he had been severely assaulted by police officers when being arrested. He had been ‘tasered’ four times at least. The taser had been applied directly to the skin, rater than from a distance, and psychiatrist compared it to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Prisons

Updated: 28 August 2022; Ref: scu.426978

Kay And Others v United Kingdom: ECHR 21 Sep 2010

(Fourth Section) After carefully considering the various views expressed in the House of Lords in Kay v Lambeth [2006] 2 AC 465 and Doherty v Birmingham [2009] 1 AC 367, and the relevant decisions of the Court of Appeal, the EurCtHR stated, at paras 65-68, that the principles laid down in Connors v UK (2005) 40 EHRR 9 and McCann v UK (2008) 47 EHRR 40 applied. In so far as the law had subsequently been developed in Doherty v Birmingham [2009] 1 AC 367, this development could not be relied on in this case.
‘The Court welcomes the increasing tendency of the domestic courts to develop and expand conventional judicial review grounds in the light of article 8. A number of their Lordships in Doherty alluded to the possibility for challenges on conventional judicial review grounds in cases such as the applicants’ to encompass more than just traditional Wednesbury grounds (see Lord Hope at para 55; Lord Scott at paras 70 and 84 to 85; and Lord Mance at paras 133 to 135 of the House of Lords judgment). However, notwithstanding these developments, the Court considers that at the time that the applicants’ cases were considered by the domestic courts, there was an important distinction between the majority and minority approaches in the House of Lords, as demonstrated by the opinions in Kay itself. In McCann, the Court agreed with the minority approach [in Kay v Lambeth [2006] 2 AC 465] although it noted that, in the great majority of cases, an order for possession could continue to be made in summary proceedings and that it would be only in very exceptional cases that an applicant would succeed in raising an arguable case which would require a court to examine the issue.’ and
‘In conclusion, the Kay applicants’ challenge to the decision to strike out their article 8 defences failed because it was not possible at that time to challenge the decision of a local authority to seek a possession order on the basis of the alleged disproportionality of that decision in light of personal circumstances. Accordingly, for the reasons given in McCann, the Court concludes that the decision by the County Court to strike out the applicant’s article 8 defences meant that the procedural safeguards required by article 8 for the assessment of the proportionality of the interference were not observed. As a result, the applicants were dispossessed of their homes without any possibility to have the proportionality of the measure determined by an independent tribunal. It follows that there has been a violation of article 8 of the Convention in the instant case.’

Citations:

[2010] ECHR 1322, 37341/06

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8

Citing:

See Also – Kay And Others v United Kingdom ECHR 17-Oct-2008
. .
Applied – Connors v The United Kingdom ECHR 27-May-2004
The applicant gypsies had initially been permitted to locate their caravan on a piece of land owned by a local authority, but their right of occupation was brought to an end because the local authority considered that they were committing a . .
Applied – 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 by:

Cited – 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 – Manchester City Council v Pinnock SC 9-Feb-2011
The council tenant had wished to appeal following a possession order made after her tenancy had been demoted. The court handed down a supplemental judgment to give effect to its earlier decision. The Court had been asked ‘whether article 8 of the . . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Housing

Updated: 28 August 2022; Ref: scu.426994

Savez Crkava (Rijec Zivota) And Others v Croatia: ECHR 9 Dec 2010

Judges:

Christos Rozakis, P

Citations:

7798/08, [2010] ECHR 1983, 30 BHRC 112, (2012) 54 EHRR 36, [2011] Eq LR 205

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints v United Kingdom ECHR 4-Mar-2014
latterdayECHR0314
The claimant said that it had been wrongfully deprived of relief from business rates for its two temples. It asserted that it was a religion, and that the treatment was discriminatory. The government said that the refusal was on the basis alone that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Ecclesiastical

Updated: 28 August 2022; Ref: scu.426986

Miranda Van Den Berg And Noa Sarri v The Netherlands: ECHR 2 Nov 2010

A mother was complaining that the Dutch courts had ordered the return of her daughter and had rejected her case under article 13b.

Citations:

7239/08, [2010] ECHR 1947

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on 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: 28 August 2022; Ref: scu.426961

Kryvitska And Kryvitskyy v Ukraine: ECHR 2 Dec 2010

Citations:

30856/03, [2010] ECHR 1850

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 28 August 2022; Ref: scu.426841