Category: Human Rights

Lyubov Efimenko v Ukraine: ECHR 25 Nov 2010

The applicant was the mother of a young man who was robbed and killed in an attack in a bar. He died on 6 June 1993, four years and three months before the Convention came into force in relation to Ukraine. Investigations were suspended shortly after his death, but resumed after the Convention had come into force.
Held: The resumed investigations fell within its jurisdiction ratione temporis and Article 2 applied to them.

Citations:

75726/01, [2010] ECHR 1835

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – McCaughey and Another, Re Application forJudicial Review SC 18-May-2011
The claimants sought a fuller inquest into deaths at the hands of the British Army in 1990 in Northern Ireland. On opening the inquest, the coroner had declined to undertake to hold a hearing compliant with article 2, and it had not made progress. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 28 August 2022; Ref: scu.426805

HM (Iraq) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 20 Oct 2010

Appeal against order for the deportation of the applicant to Iraq.

Judges:

Pill, Jackson, Patten LJJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 1322

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights, Nationality Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, Immigration Act 1971

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 28 August 2022; Ref: scu.426703

Regina (on the Application of Smith) v Secretary of State for Defence, Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: QBD 26 Jul 2004

The claimant was divorced from her husband, a member of the armed forces, and was to receive a share of his pension. She complained that although he had been able to take his share of the pension early, she had been obliged to wait.
Held: There was no discrimination. The provisions fell within the ambit of article 8, but there was no infringement. The alternative might lead to absurd results. The scheme was clear, and could be allowed for as necessary in the negotiations in the divorce, though in this case no external transfer of the rights was available to the claimant.

Judges:

Mr Justice Wilson

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 1797 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Pension Schemes Act 1993 101C(1) 101B, European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Thomas, Regina (on the Application of) v Ministry of Defence Admn 22-May-2008
The claimant had the benefit of a pension sharing order but had not yet reached the age when, under the impugned provision, payment of the pension can be made to her yet her ex-husband is being paid his share notwithstanding, as I understand it, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Family, Discrimination, Human Rights

Updated: 27 August 2022; Ref: scu.199575

Federation of Technological Industries and Others, Regina (on the Application Of) v Customs and Excise and Another: Admn 18 Feb 2004

Judges:

Lightman J

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 254 (Admin), [2004] STC 1008, [2004] STI 441

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Commissioners of Customs and Excise, HM Attorney General v Federation of Technological Industries And 53 others CA 30-Jul-2004
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, Human Rights

Updated: 27 August 2022; Ref: scu.193706

ABC v Google Inc: QBD 1 Feb 2018

The claimant requested an interim injunction requesting that Google and others remove references to his no spent conviction.
Held: The application named the wrong defendant and otherwise failed technically.

Judges:

Mr Justice Julian Knowles

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 137 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Human Rights, Information

Updated: 27 August 2022; Ref: scu.604802

Makhlouf v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 16 Nov 2016

(Northern Ireland) The appellant (born in Tunisia) was made subject to a deportation order. He had married a UK citizen and they had a child. After moving to the UK, at various times, the relationship broke down and he was convicted of several offences. The most serious was for an assault with a weapon which he said had been on Loyalist paramilitaries and had been provoked by their racist remarks. He said that a deportation would infringe his Article 8 rights
Held: There was nothing which should have prompted them to make further enquiries as to the best interests of the children. There is nothing at all to suggest that the best interests of these children require that their father should remain in the United Kingdom. Of course there will be cases where fuller inquiries are warranted or where the best interests of children do outweigh the public interest in deportation or removal. This is emphatically not one of them.

Judges:

Lord Neuberger, President, Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Kerr, Lord Wilson, Lord Reed, Lord Hughes, Lord Thomas

Citations:

[2016] UKSC 59, [2017] Imm AR 538, [2017] 3 All ER 1, [2017] INLR 222, UKSC 2015/0092

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summaryd

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8, Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009 55

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Citing:

Appeal from – Makhlouf, Re Application for Judicial Review CANI 26-Nov-2014
Appeal against deportation order. He court was asked: ‘(1) Did the Secretary of State err in deciding to deport the appellant under the mandatory power conferred by section 32 of the 2007 Act?
(2) Did the Upper Tribunal err in law in failing . .
Cited – Berrehab v The Netherlands ECHR 21-Jun-1988
Family life arises ipso jure as between father and child where the child was conceived in wedlock. Divorce and separation do not bring family life between the child and the absent parent to an end, even if the divorce leads to a significant period . .
Cited – Sylvester v Austria ECHR 24-Apr-2003
Effective respect for family life required that future family relations between parent and child are not determined by the passage of time alone . .
Cited – Singh v Entry Clearance Officer New Delhi CA 30-Jul-2004
The applicant, an 8 year old boy, became part of his Indian family who lived in England, through an adoption recognised in Indian Law, but not in English Law. Though the adoption was genuine, his family ties had not been broken in India. The family . .
Cited – Neulinger And Shuruk v Switzerland ECHR 6-Jul-2010
(Grand Chamber) The Swiss Court had rejected the claimant mother’s claim, under article 13b of the Hague Convention, that there was a grave risk that returning the child to Israel would lead to physical or psychological harm or otherwise place him . .
Cited – Re H-B (Contact) CA 22-Apr-2015
F’s appeal against orders made on his application for contact refusing him direct contact.
Sir James Munby P said: ‘. . parental responsibility is more, much more than a mere lawyer’s concept or a principle of law. It is a fundamentally . .
Cited – ZH (Tanzania) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 1-Feb-2011
The respondent had arrived and claimed asylum. Three claims were rejected, two of which were fraudulent. She had two children by a UK citizen, and if deported the result would be (the father being unsuitable) that the children would have to return . .
Cited – Ferrari v Romania ECHR 28-Apr-2015
. .
Cited – Re A (A Child) CA 6-Sep-2013
In the context of an intractable contact dispute, firmer case management may be required lest the family care system itself should contribute to the failure to develop a relationship with both parents, thereby violating the child’s article 8 rights . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 27 August 2022; Ref: scu.571292

Makhlouf, Re Application for Judicial Review: CANI 26 Nov 2014

Appeal against deportation order. He court was asked: ‘(1) Did the Secretary of State err in deciding to deport the appellant under the mandatory power conferred by section 32 of the 2007 Act?
(2) Did the Upper Tribunal err in law in failing to find that the Secretary of State and First-tier Tribunal had erred in law and in refusing to set aside the decision of the First-tier Tribunal?
(3) Did the Upper Tribunal err contrary to section 6 of the Human Rights Act in failing to set aside the decision to deport in the absence of any tangible evidence for any article 8(2) justification of the encroachment of the article 8 rights of the appellant’s children in circumstances where the Tribunal had not been specifically asked to address this point by the parties?’
Held: The appeal failed.
On the first issue the Court of Appeal concluded that section 32 played no part in the Secretary of State’s decision. Had it done so, it would have been unnecessary to consider para 396 of the Immigration Rules and the decision letter had made it abundantly clear that this had been taken into account – para 35 of the court’s judgment. The first ground of appeal was therefore dismissed.
The factors amply supported the conclusion that the appellant’s deportation was conducive to the public good. As to the delay this could be important but not in this case.
The court rejected the suggestion that there should have been further investigation of the impact that the deportation of the appellant might have on the lives of his children, observing that ‘these children did not require the disruption of further investigation in circumstances where a court with appropriate jurisdiction had made important decisions in relation to their welfare’.

Judges:

Morgan LCJ, Coghlin LJ and Gillen LJ

Citations:

[2014] NICA 86

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

UK Borders Act 2007 32

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Cited by:

Appeal from – Makhlouf v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 16-Nov-2016
(Northern Ireland) The appellant (born in Tunisia) was made subject to a deportation order. He had married a UK citizen and they had a child. After moving to the UK, at various times, the relationship broke down and he was convicted of several . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 27 August 2022; Ref: scu.552629

Ferrari v Romania: ECHR 28 Apr 2015

Citations:

1714/10 – Chamber Judgment, [2015] ECHR 429, [2015] 2 FLR 303, [2015] 3 FCR 296, [2015] Fam Law 764

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Makhlouf v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 16-Nov-2016
(Northern Ireland) The appellant (born in Tunisia) was made subject to a deportation order. He had married a UK citizen and they had a child. After moving to the UK, at various times, the relationship broke down and he was convicted of several . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Family

Updated: 27 August 2022; Ref: scu.546127

Regina v Qazi and Another: CACD 4 Nov 2010

The defendant appealed against sentence, saying that given his serious medical condition, any imprisonment would threaten his human rights.
Held: The court set out the law. A court imposing a sentence should not concern itself with the adequacy of arrangements in prisons save where the nere fact of inprisonmentt will inevitably expose the prisoner to inhuman or degrading treatment contrary to Article 3. The Court was doubtful, given the detailed protocols for the treatment of prisoners, that this would ever arise. However, were it to arise, it would be impossible for the sentencing court to pass a sentence of imprisonment which brought with it an inevitable breach of Article 3.
‘We have reached the following conclusions:
i) The court is entitled to take into account the fact that there are the arrangements that we have outlined at paragraph 23 to 27 above to ensure that prisoners with severe medical conditions in public sector prisons are treated in accordance with their Convention rights, and there are the duties of the Secretary of State of the type set out in Clive Spinks to which we referred at paragraph 21 above, to release the prisoner if that is the only way a breach of Article 3 can be remedied.
ii) On the basis of those arrangements and their continued operation in practice, a sentencing court need not be concerned in the allocation of a prisoner to a specific prison in the discharge of its duties under Article 3. Furthermore, provided that the arrangements that we have set out for the provision of health care under the overall responsibility of the Secretaries of State are maintained and work in practice, a sentencing court does not need to enquire into the facilities in prison for the treatment of a medical condition. The court can be satisfied that there is a proper system for allocation to a prison where health care can be provided in accordance with the procedure we have set out, and that a sentence of imprisonment will not create a risk of a breach of Article 3.
iii) It is only in circumstances where the very fact of imprisonment itself might expose the individual to a real risk of an Article 3 breach that the court will be called upon to enquire into whether sentencing a person to custody will mean a breach of Article 3. That is a quite different circumstance from the kind of enquiry carried out in Hetherington as to whether facilities in a particular prison were adequate. It is an enquiry that can only arise where there is proper medical evidence before a court that any sentence of imprisonment ipso facto would cause a breach of Article 3. We are doubtful if circumstances will ever arise in which such a submission could be made, but if they should ever arise, it would be an exceptionally rare event.
iv) If any such circumstances should ever arise, then the sentencing court must be provided with detailed medical evidence with an attached statement of truth by a properly qualified medical expert setting out the ground why imprisonment ipso facto will cause a breach of Article 3; such a statement must be served on the court and on the Crown Prosecution Service well in advance of the hearing so that the Crown Prosecution Service can, in conjunction with the Secretary of State for Justice, make the appropriate enquiries and produce medical evidence to the court.
v) Once a sentence of imprisonment has been imposed, unless it is to be contended on appeal that the judge should not have imposed a sentence of imprisonment because imprisonment anywhere would ipso facto cause a breach of Article 3, the relevance of an appellant’s medical condition relates solely to the assessment of the overall length of the sentence in accordance with the principles established in Barnard.
vi) Any issues as to breach of the duties of the Secretary of State in relation to medical treatment and conditions in prison are matters for civil remedies and not for this division of the Court of Appeal.’

Judges:

Thomas LJ, Dobbs, Sharp JJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Crim 2579, [2011] 2 Cr App R (S) 8, [2011] Crim LR 159, [2011] HRLR 4

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Bernard CACD 2-Jul-1996
The court considered the general effect of serious medical condition on sentencing, and how it should allow for such a condition.
Held: A sentencing court is fully entitled to take account of a medical condition by way of mitigation as a . .
Cited – Price v United Kingdom ECHR 10-Jul-2001
The applicant complained that she had been subject to degrading treatment, by virtue of the conditions under which she had first been held in a police cell, and subsequently in prison. She was very severely disabled, and the treatment was unsuitable . .
Cited – Regina (P) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another; Regina (Q and Another) v Same CA 20-Jul-2001
The court was asked as to the separation on sentence of a mother from a very young child.
Held: A sentencing court is bound by section 6(1) of the Human Rights Act 1998 to have regard for the provisions of the Convention when sentencing. . .
Cited – Regina (Nathan Brookes) v Secretary of State for Justice Admn 2008
At least a minimum standard of health care was to be provided to those held in prisons. . .
Cited – Gelman v France ECHR 2006
Article 3 requires: ‘the state to ensure that prisoners are detained in conditions which are compatible with respect for human dignity, that the manner and method of the execution of the measure do not subject them to distress or hardship of an . .
Cited – Spinks, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 28-Jan-2005
May LJ said that if the State was in breach of its Article 3 obligations, that had to be remedied. If the only way to remedy was to release the prisoner, then the Secretary of State for Justice would be obliged to order his immediate release. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Hall v Regina CACD 8-Feb-2013
The defendant had been convicted of the importation of large volumes of cocaine. He was however at the time of sentencing, ‘a man who suffers from an extremely grave combination of rare long term medical conditions which interfere with virtually all . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Sentencing, Human Rights

Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.425945

Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills v Doffman and Another: ChD 11 Oct 2010

The defendants applied for directors’ disqualification proceedings for the claim to be struck out or dismissed on the ground that the respondent had breached their rights to a fair trial under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights and/or breached his duty to act fairly, in that they had failed to disclose material of assistance to the directors, and had allowed a bank have the run of the prosecution.
Held: The application failed. Though the consequences of a disqualification are serious, such proceedings were not criminal in nature, and the duties of the Secretary of State did not extend to supervision of the investigation, and nor to create a duty as to the collection of evidence, but only as to the disclosure of what had been assembled. The court suggested other possible remedies for a director who felt he had been treated unfairly. In this case the relevant documents had been disclosed, even if only tardily. The other complaints were matters capable of being dealt with by the judge on the hearing of the disqualification application, and went as to the strength of the case, not as to abuse. As to the obtaining of documentation: ‘section 7(4) may not entitle the Secretary of State to insist on the production of much, if anything, that a defendant could not have sought by means of an application for non-party disclosure.’

Judges:

Newey J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 2518 (Ch), [2011] Bus LR 457

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 7(4) 16, European Convention on Human Rights 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Hennessey (Timothy) CACD 1978
The court considered the obligations of the prosecution on disclosure. The courts must: ‘keep in mind that those who prepare and conduct prosecutions owe a duty to the courts to ensure that all relevant evidence of help to an accused is either led . .
Cited – Sinclair v Her Majesty’s Advocate PC 11-May-2005
(Devolution) The defendant complained that the prosecutor had failed to disclose all the witness statements taken, which hid inconsistencies in their versions of events.
Held: The appeal was allowed. It was fundamental to a fair trial that the . .
Cited – Jespers v Belgium ECHR 1981
ECHR (Commission) Article 6, paragraph I of the Convention
(a) A virulent press campaign can, in certain circumstances, adversely affect the fairness of a trial and involve the State’s responsibility, . .
Cited – In re Sevenoaks Stationers (Retail) Ltd CA 1990
The court gave guidelines for the periods of disqualification to be applied for company directors under the Act. The maximum period of ten years should be reserved for only the most serious of cases. Periods of two to five years should apply to . .
Cited – Regina v Ward (Judith) CACD 15-Jul-1992
The defendant had been wrongly convicted of IRA bombings. She said that the prosecution had failed to disclose evidence.
Held: The prosecution’s forensic scientists are under a common law duty to disclose to the defence anything they may . .
Cited – Edwards v The United Kingdom ECHR 16-Dec-1992
The fact that the elderly victim of the robbery of which the defendant had been convicted had failed to pick out Mr Edwards when she was shown two volumes of photographs of possible burglars which included his photograph was not disclosed to the . .
Cited – Re Walter L Jacob Ltd CA 1989
Having authorised an enquiry under section 447, the Secretary of State presented a winding-up petition of the respondent, an authorised dealer in securities. The company had been obliged to cease trade by its regulatory body. The judge held that the . .
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 Moonlight Foods Ltd , Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v Hickling 1996
The Secretary of State, when presenting an application for the disqualification of a company director is obliged to present a balanced picture. ‘It is accepted that these are not ordinary adversarial proceedings but have an element of public . .
Cited – British Broadcasting Corporation v United Kingdom ECHR 18-Jan-1996
(Commission – Admissibility) The Corporation complained that it had been served with a witness summons obliging it to to hand over materials in its possession, both broadcast and not-broadacst being coverage of a riot. . .
Cited – Arrow Nominees Inc and Another v Blackledge and Others CA 22-Jun-2000
A petition had been lodged alleging unfair prejudice in the conduct of the company’s affairs. The defendants alleged that when applying for relief under section 459, the claimants had attempted to pervert the course of justice by producing forged or . .
Cited – Re Finelist Limited ChD 2004
Laddie J discussed the seriousness of the consequences of a director’s disqualification, saying: ‘It is the seriousness of these consequences and the fact that such orders are sought by the [Secretary of State] on behalf of the public which should . .
Cited – Official Receiver v Stern and Another CA 20-Nov-2001
The director appealed against a 12 year disqualification. The basis of the disqualification was unlawful trading to the detriment of creditors, and taking excess drawings. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Cathie and Another v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills CA 1-Jun-2012
The directors appealed against disqualification orders made against them under the 1986 Act. Their company had become insolvent, owing substantial arrears of PAYE and NI contributions. The revenue had said that they had paid other creditors first. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Company, Human Rights, Litigation Practice

Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.425967

Regina v Mustaq: CACD 2005

It is unlawful for a court, as a public authority for the purposes of s. 6(3) of the 1998 Act, to act in a way incompatible with defendant’s rights enshrined in article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

Judges:

Lord Roger

Citations:

[2005] 2 Cr Ap R 32

Statutes:

Human Rights Act 1998 6(3), European Convention on Human Rights 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Hammerton v Hammerton CA 23-Mar-2007
The husband appealed against his committal for contempt of a court order in family proceedings. The court had heard the wife’s application for his committal at the same time as his application for contact with the children.
Held: The appeal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Human Rights

Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.250483

Machado v Secretary of State for the Home Deptment: CA 19 May 2005

At issue was a decision of the Home Secretary to deport on grounds of public policy a foreign national married to an EU national with a right of establishment in the United Kingdom. The substantive issue was whether the decision of the IAT to uphold the adjudicator’s rejection of an appeal against a decision to deport the appellant is sustainable. The applicant had failed in his asylum claim, and in his time here been repeatedly been convicted and imprisoned. He had now married an English woman. The Home Secretary had concluded this to be a marriage of convenience.
Held: The IAT had failed to look at the issues it was required to consider. ‘it must be considered on the issue of whether the threat to a fundamental interest to society is such that it is proportionate in all the circumstances to deport the appellant. Next, the issue of proportionality arises under Article 8 of the ECHR.’ The appeal was allowed and the matter remitted to a different tribunal.

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 597

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2000 21(3)(b), European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Huang v The Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 1-Mar-2005
The adjudicator’s function is effectively to retake the Home Secretary’s decision. In doing so he will have regard to the Home Secretary’s policy in relation to the deportation of offenders as a material fact but not as a substitute for or a fetter . .
Cited – Carpenter v Secretary of State for the Home Department ECJ 11-Jul-2002
The applicant had come to England on a six month visitor’s visa. She then married an English national, but her visa was not extended.
Held: The husband had business interests and activities throughout the community. The deportation of the . .
Cited – Rutili v Ministre De L’Interieur ECJ 28-Oct-1975
Europa 1. The expression ‘subject to limitations justified on grounds of public policy’ in article 48 concerns not only the legislative provisions adopted by each member state to limit within its territory . .
Cited – Secretry of State for the Home Department v Akrich ECJ 23-Sep-2003
After being deported twice from England, the applicant returned secretly, married a British citizen, and sought leave to remain. He was deported, but to Ireland where his new spouse was then established. He sought to rely upon the case of Surinder . .
Cited – Regina v Westminster City Council Ex Parte Ermakov CA 14-Nov-1995
The applicant, having moved here from Greece, applied for emergency housing. The Council received no reply to its requests for corroboration sent to Greece. Housing was refused, but the officer later suggested that the real reason was that the . .
Cited – Georgios Orfanopoulos and Others v Land Baden-Wurttemberg. ECJ 29-Apr-2004
When considering a claim to resist deportation ‘the requirement of the existence of a present threat must, as a general rule, be satisfied at the time of the expulsion.’
Europa On the interpretation of . .
Cited – Regina v Immigration Appeal Tribunal and Surinder Singh, ex parte Secretary of State for the Home Department ECJ 7-Jul-1992
ECJ The provisions of the Treaty relating to the free movement of persons are intended to facilitate the pursuit by Community citizens of occupational activities of all kinds throughout the Community and preclude . .
Cited – Nazli and Others v Stadt Nurnberg ECJ 10-Feb-2000
Europa EEC-Turkey Association Agreement – Freedom of movement for workers – Articles 6(1) and 14(1) of Decision No 1/80 of the Association Council – Registration as duly belonging to the labour force of a Member . .
Cited – Amrohalli v Denmark ECHR 11-Jul-2002
A properly conducted examination of proportionality when considering a deportation is quite capable of producing a decision in favour of the applicant. . .
Cited – Regina (Daly) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 23-May-2001
A prison policy requiring prisoners not to be present when their property was searched and their mail was examined was unlawful. The policy had been introduced after failures in search procedures where officers had been intimidated by the presence . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.225008

Re A (A Child): CA 6 Sep 2013

In the context of an intractable contact dispute, firmer case management may be required lest the family care system itself should contribute to the failure to develop a relationship with both parents, thereby violating the child’s article 8 rights

Citations:

[2013] EWCA Civ 1104, [2013] 3 FCR 257, [2014] 1 FLR 1185, [2013] Fam Law 1519

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Makhlouf v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 16-Nov-2016
(Northern Ireland) The appellant (born in Tunisia) was made subject to a deportation order. He had married a UK citizen and they had a child. After moving to the UK, at various times, the relationship broke down and he was convicted of several . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Human Rights

Updated: 26 August 2022; Ref: scu.515011

Gillberg v Sweden: ECHR 2 Nov 2010

The applicant, professor in adolescent psychiatry had collected assorted data after having given undertakings to the parents of the children as to its absolute privacy. A sociologist had applied for and been given authority for its release by the Swedish Courts. The applicant had been refused a right tp participate in the court proceedings, and refused access. His colleagues destroyed the data, and he was prosecuted and convicted.
Held: His claims failed.

Judges:

Josep Casadevall, P

Citations:

41723/06, [2010] ECHR 1676

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights, Helsinki Declaration

Citing:

Cited – Akdivar and Others v Turkey ECHR 16-Sep-1996
ECHR Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (abuse of process); Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); Violation of Art. 8; Violation of Art. 25-1; Violation of P1-1; No . .

Cited by:

3rd Section judgment – Gillberg v Sweden ECHR 3-Apr-2012
(Grand Chamber) The applicant, a consultant psychiatrist, had conducted research with children under undertakings of absolute privacy. Several years later a researcher, for proper reasons, obtained court orders for the disclosure of the data under . .
Cited – Kennedy v The Charity Commission SC 26-Mar-2014
The claimant journalist sought disclosure of papers acquired by the respondent in its conduct of enquiries into the charitable Mariam appeal. The Commission referred to an absolute exemption under section 32(2) of the 2000 Act, saying that the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Information, Health Professions

Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.425735

MM v The United Kingdom: ECHR 6 Oct 2010

Citations:

24029/07, [2010] ECHR 1588

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

See Also – MM v The United Kingdom ECHR 13-Nov-2012
ECHR The applicant complained about the retention and disclosure in the context of a criminal record check of data concerning a caution she received from the police. he applicant, who lived in Northern Ireland, . .
Cited – The Christian Institute and Others v The Lord Advocate SC 28-Jul-2016
(Scotland) By the 2014 Act, the Scottish Parliament had provided that each child should have a named person to monitor that child’s needs, with information about him or her shared as necessary. The Institute objected that the imposed obligation to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Police

Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.425729

Yoldas v Turkey – French Text: ECHR 23 Feb 2010

Yoldas was charged with belonging to an illegal organisation. He had been informed of his rights by the public prosecutor and by the judge who placed him on remand. He signed a form saying that he had the right to appoint a legal representative who could be present when his statement was taken, and that he could benefit from the legal assistance of a legal representative appointed by the bar association if he was not in a position to appoint one. He stated that he understood his rights but that he did not wish to be assisted a lawyer.
Held: Recalling Salduz, the Court said that, to be effective any waiver of the right to take part in the trial must be established unequivocally and be surrounded by a minimum of guarantees as to its seriousness. Applying those principles to the facts of the case it noted that he had been reminded of his right to legal assistance, that he refused it and that it clearly emerged from his statements taken whilst in custody that his decision to waive his right to legal assistance was freely and voluntarily made: ‘Hence, the applicant’s waiver of this right was unequivocal and surrounded by a minimum guarantee.’

Citations:

[2010] ECHR 1 620, 27503/04

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – McGowan (Procurator Fiscal) v B SC 23-Nov-2011
The appellant complained that after arrest, though he had been advised of his right to legal advice, and had declined the offer, it was still wrong to have his subsequent interview relied upon at his trial.
Held: It was not incompatible with . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Criminal Practice

Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.425749

Virdi v The Law Society: Admn 18 Feb 2009

The court dismissed the appeal of Mr Virdi from the findings and order of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal finding him guilty of serious professional misconduct and suspending him from practice for a period of 3 years. The solicitor complained of the extent of the involvement of the clerk to the tribunal, an employee of the defendant, was involved in the conduct of proceedings, in particular in drafting the committee’s decision.
Held: The Tribunal had power to permit the clerk to retire with them when they considered their decision and to assist them by drafting part of the formal findings by virtue of rule 31(a).
Scott Baker LJ discussed the suggestion that the proceedings infringed his Article 6 rights, and found that 1. The SDT is entirely independent of the Law Society. The historical and financial connections are well documented as are the steps that have been taken to keep the two bodies separate.
2. The independence of the Tribunal is well established on the authorities.
3. The attack in the present case is not directly on the Tribunal but on the clerk, it being alleged that because she was employed by the Law Society that this in some way tainted the Tribunal’s decision because the Law Society was the prosecutor and neither party should have any connection with the Tribunal. Examination of the clerk’s position however shows that her employment by the Law Society (as with all Tribunal clerks) is not employment in the ordinary sense of the word but very much technical employment for remuneration purposes.
4. The clerk was not the decision maker, either by virtue of her position or on the particular facts of this case. Even taking the broadest view of what the independent and informed observer might think, I can see no basis for concluding that the Tribunal’s decision could be considered to be biased against the appellant.
5. Nothing the clerk did was improper. She was not in any way a party to the decision. She followed the ordinary administrative procedures adopted in other cases. She was entitled to assist in drafting the findings document which, in the event, was not in any way inconsistent with the extempore reasons give by the Chair on 26th October 2007.

Judges:

Scott Baker LJ and David Clarke J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 918 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Solicitors (Disciplinary Proceedings) Rules 1994 31(a), European Convention on Human Rights 6

Cited by:

Appeal from – Virdi v The Law Society of England and Wales and Another CA 16-Feb-2010
The claimant solicitor complained that in disciplinary proceedings brought against him by the respondent, the clerk to the tribunal had drafted the judgment, even though she had been an emloyee of the respondent.
Held: The description of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Professions, Natural Justice, Human Rights

Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.425526

Grosskopf v Germany: ECHR 21 Oct 2010

The Court considered whether a sufficient causal connection existed between the applicant’s original conviction and his continuing preventive detention.
Held: The Court expressed concern about the apparent absence of any special measures, instruments or institutions to address the danger presented by persons subject to preventive detention and to limit the duration of their detention, but did so purely in the context of considering whether a sufficient causal connection existed between the applicant’s original conviction and his continuing preventive detention.

Citations:

24478/03, [2010] ECHR 1581

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Haney and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Justice SC 10-Dec-2014
The four claimants, each serving indeterminate prison sentences, said that as they approached the times when thy might apply for parol, they had been given insufficient support and training to meet the requirements for release. The courts below had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Prisons

Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.425434

Patricia Armani Da Silva v The United Kingdom: ECHR 28 Sep 2010

The applicant complained of the failure to convict anyone of a serious criminal offence after her innocent cousin was shot dead by police officers who said they mistook him for a suicide bomber.

Citations:

5878/08, [2010] ECHR 150

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Citing:

At Admn – Da Silva, Regina (on the Application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions and Another Admn 14-Dec-2006
An innocent bystander had been shot dead by police mistaking him for a suicide bomber. The claimant, a cousin, challenged decisions not to prosecute any officer for murder or manslaughter or any other criminal offence.
Held: Review was . .

Cited by:

See Also – Patricia Armani Da Silva v The United Kingdom ECHR 7-Jul-2012
The claimant’s cousin had been shot by police mistakenly thinking he was a terrorist with a suicide bomb. . .
See Also – Patricia Armani Da Silva v The United Kingdom ECHR 12-Jul-2012
The claimant’s innocent cousin Jean Charles de Menezes had been shot and killed by police officers seeking a suicide bomber. She had complained that after investigation, no police officer had been prosecuted for any serious offence of murder or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 25 August 2022; Ref: scu.425405