Category: Human Rights

E v Channel Four, News International Ltd and St Helens Borough Council: FD 1 Jun 2005

The applicant sought an order restraining publication by the defendants of material, saying she did not have capacity to consent to the publication. She suffered a multiple personality disorder. She did herself however clearly wish the film to be broadcast, and she wished to criticise her care.
Held: An injunction was refused. ‘If Pamela has capacity then, just as in the case of a ‘Gillick competent’ child, her wishes are determinative. The court cannot exercise the inherent jurisdiction and, unless Pamela herself wishes to apply for an injunction (and she does not), it follows that the court equally cannot grant any injunction.’ The applicant had first to establish lack of capacity. The 2005 Act, whilst not yet in force applied many common law principles. The claimants had not established that it was likely that they would be able to establish lack of capacity to consent at trial. Obiter, te claimant had failed also to establish that it was not in the patient’s best interests for the film to be shown.

Judges:

Munby J

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 1144 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Capacity Act 2005

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Botta v Italy ECHR 24-Feb-1998
The claimant, who was disabled, said that his Article 8 rights were infringed because, in breach of Italian law, there were no facilities to enable him to get to the sea when he went on holiday.
Held: ‘Private life . . includes a person’s . .
Cited – Presidents Practice Direction (Applications for Reporting Restriction Orders) 2005
. .
Cited – Practice Note (Official Solicitor: Deputy Director of Legal Services: Cafcass: Applications for Reporting Restriction Orders) 2005
. .
Cited – In re S (a Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication) HL 28-Oct-2004
Inherent High Court power may restrain Publicity
The claimant child’s mother was to be tried for the murder of his brother by poisoning with salt. It was feared that the publicity which would normally attend a trial, would be damaging to S, and an application was made for reporting restrictions to . .
Cited – Bensaid v The United Kingdom ECHR 6-Feb-2001
The applicant was a schizophrenic and an illegal immigrant. He claimed that his removal to Algeria would deprive him of essential medical treatment and sever ties that he had developed in the UK that were important for his well-being. He claimed . .
Cited – In re a local authority (Inquiry: restraint on publication); A Local Authority v A Health Authority and A FD 27-Nov-2003
The authority had carried out an inquiry into its handling of an application for a care order. It sought to restrain republication of the report.
Held: There were competing requirements under the Convention. Any jurisdiction to restrain . .
Cited – X, A Woman Formerly Known As Mary Bell v Stephen O’Brien, News Group Newspapers Ltd MGN Ltd QBD 21-May-2003
An injunction effective against the world, was granted to restrain any act to identify the claimant in the media, including the Internet. She had been convicted of murder when a child, and had since had a child herself. An order had been granted . .
Cited – Keenan v The United Kingdom ECHR 3-Apr-2001
A young prisoner was known to be at risk of suicide, but nevertheless was not provided with adequate specialist medical supervision. He was punished for an offence, by way of segregation which further put him at risk.
Held: Inhuman and . .
Cited – Ashworth Security Hospital v MGN Limited HL 27-Jun-2002
Order for Journalist to Disclose Sources
The newspaper published details of the medical records of Ian Brady, a prisoner and patient of the applicant. The applicant sought an order requiring the defendant newspaper to disclose the identity of the source of material which appeared to have . .
Cited – In re F (Mental Patient: Sterilisation) HL 4-May-1989
Where a patient lacks capacity, there is the power to provide him with whatever treatment or care is necessary in his own best interests. Medical treatment can be undertaken in an emergency even if, through a lack of capacity, no consent had been . .
Cited – S v McC; W v W HL 1972
The distinction between the court’s ‘custodial’ and ‘protective’ jurisdictions was recognised. The case concerned the ordering of blood tests with a view to determining the paternity of a child involved in divorce proceedings. This was not a matter . .
Cited – Sheffield City Council v E; Re E (An Alleged Patient) FD 2-Dec-2004
The council sought an order to prevent E, a patient from contracting a marriage which it considered unwise. As a preliminary issue the parties sought guidance as to the questions to be put to the expert as to capacity.
Held: The woman suffered . .
Cited – Re Angela Roddy (a child) (identification: restriction on publication), Torbay Borough Council v News Group Newspapers FD 2-Dec-2003
A twelve year old girl had become pregnant. The Catholic Church was said to have paid her not to have an abortion. After the birth she and her baby were taken into care. The authority proposed the adoption of the baby. There was more publicity. . .
Cited – In Re S (Hospital Patient: Court’s Jurisdiction) CA 6-Mar-1995
The carer of S sought a declaration that S’s wife and son were not entitled to remove him to Norway.
Held: The court may try an issue as to the patient’s care as between rival claimants as carers. It should not tightly restrict list of carers . .
Cited – In Re F (Adult: Court’s Jurisdiction) CA 25-Jul-2000
The local authority sought a declaration as to its rights to control the daily activities of an eighteen year old, who was incapable of managing her own affairs but was not subject to mental health legislation.
Held: There remained an inherent . .
Cited – Re A (Male Sterilisation) CA 2000
The court considered the duties of a doctor, asking whether a procedure should be undertaken for a patient without the capacity to consent: Dame Elizabeth Butler-Sloss said: ‘The doctor, acting to that required standard, has, in my view, a second . .
Cited – In Re S (Adult Patient: Sterilisation) CA 26-May-2000
The court should decide what is in the best interests of a patient where she was unable to give consent herself. The test of whether what was proposed was within the range of what reasonable and competent medical practitioners might propose, got the . .
Cited – In re MB (Medical Treatment) CA 26-Mar-1997
The patient was due to deliver a child. A delivery by cesarean section was necessary, but the mother had a great fear of needles, and despite consenting to the operation, refused the necessary consent to anesthesia in any workable form.
Held: . .
Cited – Cream Holdings Limited and others v Banerjee and others HL 14-Oct-2004
On her dismissal from the claimant company, Ms Banerjee took confidential papers revealing misconduct to the local newspaper, which published some. The claimant sought an injunction to prevent any further publication. The defendants argued that the . .
Cited – Masterman-Lister v Brutton and Co, Jewell and Home Counties Dairies (No 1) CA 19-Dec-2002
Capacity for Litigation
The claimant appealed against dismissal of his claims. He had earlier settled a claim for damages, but now sought to re-open it, and to claim in negligence against his former solicitors, saying that he had not had sufficient mental capacity at the . .
Cited – Nottingham City Council v October Films Ltd FD 21-May-1999
There is a need to protect children from exploitation by the media. Film makers who sought to persuade vulnerable children to participate in filming could be required to provide undertakings to the court not further to do so.
Sir Stephen Brown . .
Cited – CF v Secretary of State for the Home Department FD 30-Jan-2004
The court considered the choice or procedures arising in relation to a baby ward of court living with its mother in prison. The sentence to be served would take the child beyond the maximum age provided for in mother and baby units. . .
Cited – In re S (Adult patient) (Inherent jurisdiction: Family life); Sheffield City Council v S FD 2002
A court could only grant an order permitting treatment despite the absence of an adult patient’s consent by virtue of the doctrine of necessity.
Munby J said: ‘in our multi-cultural and pluralistic society the family takes many forms . . The . .
Cited – Practice Direction (Family Proceedings: Court Bundles) 10-Mar-2000
There should at be lodged with the court a summary of the background to the hearing; a statement of the issue or issues to be determined; a summary of the order or directions sought by each party; a chronology; and skeleton arguments. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Human Rights, Health

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.228569

Hirst v The United Kingdom (No. 2): ECHR 30 Mar 2004

(Commission) The prisoner alleged that the denial of his right to vote whilst in prison was disproportionate. He was serving a life sentence for manslaughter.
Held: The denial of a right to vote was in infringement of his rights and disproportionate. Different signatory countries had applied different standards. The UK law made a great distinction between different categories of offender or crime, but did not apply the same rules to prisoners on remand or imprisoned for non-payment of fines or contempt. There was no evidence of the issues having been considered by parliament in a way which took account of the issues of human rights.

Citations:

74025/01, Times 08-Apr-2004, (2004) 38 EHRR 825, [2004] ECHR 122

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

Representation of the People Act 1983 3, European Convention on Human Rights A3-1

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina (Pearson Martinez and Hirst) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Others; Hirst v Attorney-General QBD 17-Apr-2001
A law which removed a prisoner’s right to vote whilst in prison was not incompatible with his human rights. The implied right to vote under article 3 was not absolute, and states had a wide margin of appreciation as to how and to what extent the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Nilsen v HM Prison Full Sutton and Another CA 17-Nov-2004
The prisoner, a notorious murderer had begun to write his autobiography. His solicitor wished to return a part manuscript to him in prison to be finished. The prison did not allow it, and the prisoner claimed infringement of his article 10 rights. . .
At Commission – Hirst v United Kingdom (2) ECHR 6-Oct-2005
(Grand Chamber) The applicant said that whilst a prisoner he had been banned from voting. The UK operated with minimal exceptions, a blanket ban on prisoners voting.
Held: Voting is a right not a privilege. It was a right central in a . .
At Commission – Hirst v The United Kingdom ECHR 3-Dec-2009
(Resolutions) The court noted the long delay in the respondent in implementing the judgment of the court and giving prisoners voting rights, the present consultation and adjourned until March 2011 for further information. . .
Cited – Tigere, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills SC 29-Jul-2015
After increasing university fees, the student loan system was part funded by the government. They introduced limits to the availability of such loans, and a student must have been lawfully ordinarily resident in the UK for three years before the day . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Prisons, Elections

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.195514

Miller v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 25 Mar 2004

The defendant pleaded guilty by post in March 1999 to speeding offences. The magistrates wanted to consider and (unlawfully) issued a warrant backed for bail. The warrant was not served until 2001. The appeal took a further long period.
Held: The delay was so unreasonable for this kind of case as to amount to an infringement of the defendant’s rights. There had been no difficulty created however in deciding the case, and therefore the conviction stood. The issue was remedied to the extent possible, by treating the delay as an exceptional hardship, and reducing the consequent totting up disqualification to 5 months. An order for costs was confirmed against the CPS.

Judges:

Mr Justice Richards

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 595 (Admin), Times 07-Jun-2004

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Magistrates, Road Traffic, Human Rights

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.194998

Calvo v Italy: ECHR 11 Mar 2004

Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of P1-1 ; Violation of Art. 6-1 ; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected ; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award ; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings

Citations:

59636/00, [2004] ECHR 111

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Human Rights

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.195079

Bushell and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Newcastle Licensing Justices and others: Admn 31 Jul 2003

The claimants objected to a forced transfer of an unused justices on-line for the benefit of the licencee applicants. The licensees had first been refused a licence for certain premises, but then requested and were given transfer of an obsolete licence for nearby premises. The claimants, neighbours, asserted an infringement of their human rights.
Held: The purpose behind the application for the special removal of the on-licence so as to allow a grant to themselves was not an abuse of process. The removal of a licence might infringe the rights of the claimants as neighbours under article 8. the proceedings were a determination of those rights under article 6, but to the extent that it did, any such interference was proportionate. Remedies and protections were provided.

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Owen

Citations:

[2003] EWHC 1937 (Admin), Times 01-Sep-2003

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Licensing Act 1964 15, European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – In re Marjory 1955
Lord Evershed said: ‘ . . court proceedings may not be used or threatened for the purpose of obtaining for the person so using for threatening them some collateral advantage to himself, and not for the purpose for which such proceedings are properly . .
Cited – Goldsmith v Sperrings Ltd CA 1977
Claims for Collateral Purpose treated as abuse
The plaintiff commenced proceedings for damages for libel and an injunction against the publishers, the editors and the main distributors of Private Eye. In addition, he issued writs against a large number of other wholesale and retail distributors . .
Cited – Asselbourg v Luxembourg ECHR 1995
The applicants complained that the grant of licences for a steelworks would result in pollution, release of toxic gases and noise, and that the grant of the licences would infringe their article 8 rights. The court rejected the application ‘From the . .
Cited – Regina (Vetterlein) v Hampshire County Council Admn 2001
The claimants challenged a planning permission granted to a waste disposal site, saying that it violated their article 8 rights.
Held: The court asked whether there was reasonable and convincing evidence that the claimants quality of life . .
Cited – Regina (Holding and Barnes plc) v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and the Regions; Regina (Alconbury Developments Ltd and Others) v Same and Others HL 9-May-2001
Power to call in is administrative in nature
The powers of the Secretary of State to call in a planning application for his decision, and certain other planning powers, were essentially an administrative power, and not a judicial one, and therefore it was not a breach of the applicants’ rights . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Bushell and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Newcastle Upon Tyne Licensing Justices and others Admn 15-Mar-2004
Objection was made to the removal of an old on-license by the magistrates.
Held: The justices had had no jurisdiction under section 15 because, at the time the application came before the justices, the premises of Mim’s Bar were not ‘occupied’ . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Licensing, Human Rights

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.185632

Regina v Perrin: CACD 22 Mar 2002

The defendant had been convicted of publishing obscene articles for gain under the Act. He lived in London, and published a web site which was stored or hosted abroad, containing pornographic items. The investigating officer had called up the web-site from within the UK. The defendant appealed saying that he had not acted within the UK, and had not committed the offence, and that the allegation was bad as imprecise, and that there had been no publication within the jurisdiction.
Held: Whilst the number of people who might be corrupted had to be more than negligible, no licence to publish was obtained because many readers or viewers would not be corrupted. The availability of the material as a preview page was relevant when considering who might see the article, and may be corrupted. That a viewer may already be corrupted is not to say that the material provided may not further corrupt him. One officer seeing the material was sufficient to constitute publication. The argument as to imprecision required additional words to be imported into the convention. The internet is a worldwide system, and applying the laws of each country in which a page may be read could lead to the most restrictive laws being universally applied. The restriction on expression did engage the defendants rights, but was necessary in a free and democratic society. It was not necessary for a prosecutor to show where the major steps in publication took place to found jurisdiction. See also CL vol 13 issue 2 for comment)

Judges:

Lord Justice Kennedy, Lord Justice Potter, And Mr Justice Harrison

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Crim 747, [2002] EWCA Crim 747

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Statutes:

Obscene Publications Act 1959 2(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Barker CCA 1962
. .
Cited – Regina v Clayton and Halsey CCA 1963
Two experienced police officers in plain clothes had entered a bookshop owned by Clayton in which Halsey was his assistant. The officers had each selected a packet of photographs which formed the subject matter of the substantive charges. In . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Whyte HL 1972
Lord Wilberforce said: ‘The Obscene Publications Act 1959 adopted the expression ‘deprave and corrupt’ but gave a new turn to it. Previously, though appearing in Cockburn C.J.’s formula, the words had in fact been largely disregarded: the courts . .
Cited – Regina v O’Sullivan CACD 1995
. .
Cited – The Sunday Times (No 1) v The United Kingdom ECHR 26-Apr-1979
Offence must be ;in accordance with law’
The court considered the meaning of the need for an offence to be ‘in accordance with law.’ The applicants did not argue that the expression prescribed by law required legislation in every case, but contended that legislation was required only where . .
Cited – Groppera Radio Ag And Others v Switzerland ECHR 28-Mar-1990
Hudoc No violation of Art. 10; Not necessary to examine Art. 13 . .
Cited – Muller And Others v Switzerland ECHR 24-May-1988
The Court considered a complaint that Article 10 had been infringed by the applicant’s conviction of an offence of publishing obscene items, consisting of paintings which were said ‘mostly to offend the sense of sexual propriety of persons of . .
Cited – Wingrove v The United Kingdom ECHR 25-Nov-1996
The applicant had been refused a certification certificate for his video ‘Visions of Ecstasy’ on the basis that it infringed the criminal law of blasphemy. The Court found that the offence was prescribed by law and served the legitimate aim of . .
Cited – Handyside v The United Kingdom ECHR 7-Dec-1976
Freedom of Expression is Fundamental to Society
The appellant had published a ‘Little Red Schoolbook’. He was convicted under the 1959 and 1964 Acts on the basis that the book was obscene, it tending to deprave and corrupt its target audience, children. The book claimed that it was intended to . .

Cited by:

Cited – Sheppard and Another, Regina v CACD 29-Jan-2010
The defendants appealed against their convictions for publishing racially inflammatory material. They skipped bail during the trial, were convicted in their absence, and returned after being refused asylum in the US. The convictions related to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Human Rights, Media

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.170012

Regina (on the application of S) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police, Regina (Marper) v Same: CA 12 Sep 2002

The applicants had been charged with offences, but later acquitted. On arrest they had had DNA samples and fingerprints taken, and the details added to the national DNA database. The police refused to remove the records after the acquittals.
Held: The appeals failed. The refusal to remove the records was not an infringement of a right of privacy. How it affected an individual might be a matter of his cultural background. The uses to which the DNA could be put closely matched the section. The presumption of innocence did not provide any protection against being investigated when suspected of crime. No adverse consequences could flow from the data being held unless the applicant committed a crime. The difference in treatment as against persons who had not been suspected of crime was justified.
Waller LJ said: ‘fingerprints and DNA profiles reveal only limited personal information. The physical samples potentially contain very much greater and more personal and detailed information. The anxiety is that science may one day enable analysis of samples to go so far as to obtain information in relation to an individual’s propensity to commit certain crime and be used for that purpose within the language of the present section [Section 82 of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001]. It might also be said that the law might be changed in order to allow the samples to be used for purposes other than those identified by the section. It might also be said that while samples are retained there is even now a risk that they will be used in a way that the law does not allow. So, it is said, the aims could be achieved in a less restrictive manner . . Why cannot the aim be achieved by retention of the profiles without retention of the samples?
The answer to [these] points is as I see it as follows. First the retention of samples permits (a) the checking of the integrity and future utility of the DNA database system; (b) a reanalysis for the upgrading of DNA profiles where new technology can improve the discriminating power of the DNA matching process; (c) reanalysis and thus an ability to extract other DNA markers and thus offer benefits in terms of speed, sensitivity and cost of searches of the database; (d) further analysis in investigations of alleged miscarriages of justice; and (e) further analysis so as to be able to identify any analytical or process errors. It is these benefits which must be balanced against the risks identified by Liberty. In relation to those risks, the position in any event is first that any change in the law will have to be itself Convention compliant; second any change in practice would have to be Convention compliant; and third unlawfulness must not be assumed. In my view thus the risks identified are not great, and such as they are they are outweighed by the benefits in achieving the aim of prosecuting and preventing crime.’
Lord Justice Sedley considered that the power of a chief constable to destroy data which he would ordinarily retain had to be exercised in every case, however rare such cases might be, where he or she was satisfied on conscientious consideration that the individual was free of any taint of suspicion. He also noted that the difference between the retention of samples and DNA profiles was that the retention of samples would enable more information to be derived than had previously been possible.

Judges:

Lord Woolf, Waller LJ, Sedley LJ

Citations:

Times 03-Oct-2002, Gazette 17-Oct-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 1275, [2003] 1 All ER 148, [2002] All ER (D) 62, [2002] NLJR 1483, [2002] 1 WLR 3223, [2002] 40 LS Gaz R 32, [2003] Crim LR 39

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights Art 8.1 Art 14, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 64

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina (S) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire; Regina (Marper) v Same Admn 22-Mar-2002
The police authority took samples of DNA and fingerprints from the claimants whilst under arrest. After their cases had been dismissed or failed, they requested destruction of the samples and records, but this was refused.
Held: There was no . .
Cited – Reyntjens v Belgium ECHR 1992
(Commission) ‘. . The obligation to carry an identity card and to show it to the police when requested to do so does not as such constitute an interference in a person’s private life within the meaning of Article 8 of the Convention’. . .
Cited – Regina v B (Attorney-General’s Reference No 3 of 1999); Regina v Weir CACD 26-May-2000
Where a defendant gave a sample of DNA during an investigation, but the sample was not destroyed on his acquittal, evidence obtained from a cross match relating to a different crime was not admissible. The statute requires the samples to be . .
Cited – Geitling Ruhrkohlen-Verkaufsgesellschaft and Others v ECSC High Authority ECJ 20-Mar-1957
ECJ Article 34 of the treaty is no bar to the admissibility of an application for annulment against an isolated provision of a decision as a whole, because an annulling judgment does not anticipate the measures . .
Cited – British Oxygen Co Ltd v Board of Trade HL 15-Jul-1970
Cylinders containing hydrogen gas were being put on a trailer pulled by a tractor for the purpose of delivery to the premises of the purchaser. One of the issues before the court was whether the function of the hydrogen trailers and the cylinders . .

Cited by:

Appealed to – Regina (S) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire; Regina (Marper) v Same Admn 22-Mar-2002
The police authority took samples of DNA and fingerprints from the claimants whilst under arrest. After their cases had been dismissed or failed, they requested destruction of the samples and records, but this was refused.
Held: There was no . .
Appeal from – S, Regina (on Application of) v South Yorkshire Police; Regina v Chief Constable of Yorkshire Police ex parte Marper HL 22-Jul-2004
Police Retention of Suspects DNA and Fingerprints
The claimants complained that their fingerprints and DNA records taken on arrest had been retained after discharge before trial, saying the retention of the samples infringed their right to private life.
Held: The parts of DNA used for testing . .
At Court of Appeal – Marper v United Kingdom; S v United Kingdom ECHR 16-Jan-2007
Decision as to admissibility – the applicants complained of the retention by police of DNA and fingerprint samples and records.
Held: Admissible. . .
At Court of Appeal – Marper v United Kingdom; S v United Kingdom ECHR 27-Feb-2008
Grand Chamber – Press Release – The applicant complained of the retention by the police of DNA and fingerprint records – The applicants both complain about the retention of their fingerprints and DNA samples and the fact that they are being used in . .
At Court of Appeal – Marper v United Kingdom; S v United Kingdom ECHR 4-Dec-2008
(Grand Chamber) The applicants complained that on being arrested on suspicion of offences, samples of their DNA had been taken, but then despite being released without conviction, the samples had retained on the Police database.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Human Rights

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.177313

Hirst v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Admn 22 Mar 2002

The applicant, a prisoner challenged the uniform ban on contact by prisoners with the media by telephone, arguing that it infringed his Article 10 rights.
Held: Restricting telephone contact with the media was not part of imprisonment. A democratic society need not seek to prevent prisoners from expressing their views directly to the media about grievances or concerns they had about issues affecting them. The policy insofar as it was imposed universally was unlawful.

Judges:

Mr Justice Elias

Citations:

Times 10-Apr-2002, Gazette 10-May-2002, [2002] EWHC 602 (Admin), [2002] 1 WLR 2929

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Prison Service Order 4400 6.10, European Convention on Human Rights Art 10

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Nilsen, Regina (on the Application of) v Governor of HMP Full Sutton and Another Admn 19-Dec-2003
The prisoner complained that having written an autobiography, the manuscript materials had been withheld, and that this interfered with his rights of freedom of expression.
Held: Such an action by the prison authorities was not incompatible . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Prisons, Media, Human Rights

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.172192

Regina v Director of Public Prosecutions ex parte Kebilene etc: Admn 30 Mar 1999

The applicants sought, by means of the Human Rights Act to challenge the way in which the decision had been made that they should be prosecuted under the 1989 Act, arguing that section 6(2) was inconsistent with the new Act.
Held: The Act contravened the Convention insofar as it made evidential presumptions which were incompatible with the presumption of innocence. An English court is able to apply the Convention anticipating the coming into force of the Act in the UK.
Lord Bingham CJ stated: ‘Statements by ministers concerning the future conduct of themselves and their officials can found no legitimate expectation concerning the future decisions of the Director since he, like the law officers, acts wholly independently of the executive when making decisions on the conduct of criminal proceedings. It is his public duty and responsibility to exercise his own independent judgement. He cannot be bound by any statement made on behalf of the executive, and no reasonable person alert to his constitutional role could expect him to be so bound.’
It was appropriate for the Court to review the soundness of the legal advice on which the DPP acted. The Lord Chief Justice explained: ‘Where the grant of leave to move for judicial review would delay or obstruct the conduct of criminal proceedings which ought, in the public interest, to be resolved with all appropriate expedition, the court will always scrutinise the application with the greatest care, both to satisfy itself that there are sound reasons for making the application and to satisfy itself that there are no discretionary grounds (such as delay or the availability of alternative remedies or vexatious conduct by the applicant) which should lead it to refuse leave. The court will be very slow to intervene where the applicant’s complaint is one that can be met by appropriate orders or directions in the criminal proceedings. If, however, strongly arguable grounds for making application are shown, as the single judge rightly held were shown here, and if there are no discretionary grounds for refusing relief, leave to move may properly be granted; and if on full argument grounds for granting relief are established and no discretionary grounds shown for refusing it, such relief may properly be granted even though the consequence is a delay in the resolution of criminal proceedings. Such was, no doubt, the consequence of quashing the applicant’s committal in Reg. v. Bedwellty Justices, Ex parte Williams [1997] A.C. 225. In the present case I see no discretionary reasons for refusing relief if the applicants establish a ground for granting it’

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill LCJ, Laws LJ, Sullivan J

Citations:

Times 31-Mar-1999, [1999] EWHC Admin 277, [1999] 3 WLR 175

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act 1989 6(2), European Convention on Human Rights, Human Rights Act 1998

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Secretary of State For The Home Department, Ex Parte Launder HL 13-Mar-1997
The question arose as to whether or not the decision of the Secretary of State to extradite the applicant to Hong Kong would have amounted to a breach of the European Convention on Human Rights. Although the Convention was not at that time in force . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina v Director of Public Prosecutions, ex parte Kebilene and others HL 28-Oct-1999
(Orse Kebeline) The DPP’s appeal succeeded. A decision by the DPP to authorise a prosecution could not be judicially reviewed unless dishonesty, bad faith, or some other exceptional circumstance could be shown. A suggestion that the offence for . .
Cited – Regina v Department of Education and Employment ex parte Begbie CA 20-Aug-1999
A statement made by a politician as to his intentions on a particular matter if elected could not create a legitimate expectation as regards the delivery of the promise after elected, even where the promise would directly affect individuals, and the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Evidence, Human Rights, Constitutional

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.139542

McLeod v The United Kingdom: ECHR 23 Sep 1998

A Police Officer assisting in recovery of items ordered to be returned in matrimonial proceedings acted in excess of his powers and trespassed in entering house where there was no immediate threat of breach of the peace, and no sight of disorder. An interference with private life by the police must be objectively justified under Art 8.
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8; Not necessary to examine P1-1; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings

Citations:

Times 01-Oct-1998, 72/1997/856/1065, 24755/94, [1998] ECHR 92, (1998) 27 EHRR 493, [1998] ECHR 92

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Giles, Regina (on the Application of) v Parole Board and Another HL 31-Jul-2003
The defendant had been sentenced for offences of violence, but an additional period was imposed to protect the public. He had been refused leave for reconsideration of that part of his sentence after he completed the normal segment of his sentence. . .
Cited – Keegan v United Kingdom ECHR 18-Jul-2006
The claimant had been the subject of a raid by armed police on his home. The raid was a mistake. He complained that the English legal system, in rejecting his claim had not allowed him to assert that the police action had been disproportionate.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.165663

Hirst v United Kingdom: ECHR 24 Jul 2001

The applicant asserted that the delays in the reviews, undertaken by the Parole Board, of his continued detention as a discretionary life prisoner, was a breach of his right to a speedy decision. The delays were between 21 and 24 months. Such delays were unacceptable. The article required not only a speedy conclusion, but, where an automatic repeated review was involved, those reviews must be at proper intervals. The time must be set for each separate case, and there were substantial differences between cases, and such differences might include consideration of developments and changes in mental health which might require longer periods to be assessed, and there was some flexibility to bring forward reviews, but that option was not open to the prisoner. The period was unreasonable and the case had not been decided speedily.
The court repeated the statement it had made in Oldham, and also stated in terms that ‘The court does not find that any loss of liberty may be regarded as flowing from the finding of a breach of article 5(4), which in this case is limited to the delay in between reviews’
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 5-4; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings.

Judges:

Costa Pres, Louciades, Kuris, Tulkens, Jungwiert, Bratza Greve JJ

Citations:

Times 03-Aug-2001, 40787/98, [2001] ECHR 477, [2001] ECHR 481

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights Art 5.4

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Citing:

Confirmed – Oldham v The United Kingdom ECHR 26-Sep-2000
Where a parole board took two years to consider the applicant’s parole, this was unreasonable, and a breach of the Article 5.4 requirement to deal with such matters speedily. Accordingly the continued detention of the applicant became unlawful. The . .

Cited by:

Cited – Murray v The Parole Board Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 6-Nov-2003
The applicant had been convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. He had twice previously been released on licence and had his licence revoked. His tarriff had expired The period between reviews of his detention had been two years, but . .
Cited – Wilson v Wychavon District Council and Another Admn 20-Dec-2005
The claimant complained that the law which protected an occupier of a dwelling house from a temporary stop notice did not apply to those living in caravans, and that this was discriminatory.
Held: The claim failed. ‘usually a change of use of . .
Cited – Brooke and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v The Parole Board and Another CA 1-Feb-2008
The claimant prisoner complained that the Parole Board was insufficiently independent of government to provide a fair hearing. The court at first instance had found that the relationship between the Parole Board and the sponsoring Department put the . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Tigere, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills SC 29-Jul-2015
After increasing university fees, the student loan system was part funded by the government. They introduced limits to the availability of such loans, and a student must have been lawfully ordinarily resident in the UK for three years before the day . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Prisons

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.159490

Sahin v Germany: ECHR 11 Oct 2001

When considering the issues of an adoption against the wishes of the parents, there is an apparent difference of emphasis between saying that the child’s interests are of ‘paramount importance’, and saying that they merely ‘may, depending on their nature and seriousness’ override those of the parents: ‘The Court further recalls that a fair balance must be struck between the interests of the child and those of the parent and that in doing so particular importance must be attached to the best interests of the child which, depending on their nature and seriousness, may override those of the parent. In particular the parent cannot be entitled under article 8 of the Convention to have such measures taken as would harm the child’s health and development.’

Citations:

30943/96, (2001) 36 EHRR 765, [2002] 1 FLR 119, [2010] ECHR 585

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii, Hudoc Legal Summary

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – In re T (a Child) (Contact: Alienation: Permission to Appeal) CA 24-Oct-2002
After a judgment the parties sought to appeal.
Held: The judge had failed to make a finding on a critical issue in the case, namely whether or not the mother of the child concerned had ‘even if prompted only at a subconscious level, . .
Cited – F v M FD 1-Apr-2004
The court considered the ‘ongoing debate’ about the court’s role in contact disputes. ‘this case illustrates all too uncomfortably the failings of the system. There is much wrong with our system and the time has come for us to recognise that fact . .
Cited – ANS and Another v ML SC 11-Jul-2012
The mother opposed adoption proceedings, and argued that the provision in the 2007 Act, allowing a court to dispense with her consent, infringed her rights under Article 8 and was therefore made outwith the powers of the Scottish Parliament.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Adoption

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.166602

Regina (S) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire; Regina (Marper) v Same: Admn 22 Mar 2002

The police authority took samples of DNA and fingerprints from the claimants whilst under arrest. After their cases had been dismissed or failed, they requested destruction of the samples and records, but this was refused.
Held: There was no engagement of the applicants’ art 8 rights to privacy. Even if there was, the keeping of the records would be justified under art 8.2. The new section of the 1984 Act was clear, and anyone would know what would happen with samples and fingerprints taken; they would be retained in the absence of special reason otherwise. The provision was ‘necessary in a democratic society for the prevention of disorder or crime’ and was proportionate.

Judges:

Lord Justice Rose and Mr Justice Leveson

Citations:

Times 04-Apr-2002, [2002] EWHC 478 (Admin), [2002] 1 WLR 3223

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8.1 8.2, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 64(1A), Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 82

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed to – Regina (on the application of S) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police, Regina (Marper) v Same CA 12-Sep-2002
The applicants had been charged with offences, but later acquitted. On arrest they had had DNA samples and fingerprints taken, and the details added to the national DNA database. The police refused to remove the records after the acquittals.

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina (on the application of S) v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police, Regina (Marper) v Same CA 12-Sep-2002
The applicants had been charged with offences, but later acquitted. On arrest they had had DNA samples and fingerprints taken, and the details added to the national DNA database. The police refused to remove the records after the acquittals.
At First Instance – S, Regina (on Application of) v South Yorkshire Police; Regina v Chief Constable of Yorkshire Police ex parte Marper HL 22-Jul-2004
Police Retention of Suspects DNA and Fingerprints
The claimants complained that their fingerprints and DNA records taken on arrest had been retained after discharge before trial, saying the retention of the samples infringed their right to private life.
Held: The parts of DNA used for testing . .
At First Instance – Marper v United Kingdom; S v United Kingdom ECHR 4-Dec-2008
(Grand Chamber) The applicants complained that on being arrested on suspicion of offences, samples of their DNA had been taken, but then despite being released without conviction, the samples had retained on the Police database.
Held: . .
At First Instance – Marper v United Kingdom; S v United Kingdom ECHR 27-Feb-2008
Grand Chamber – Press Release – The applicant complained of the retention by the police of DNA and fingerprint records – The applicants both complain about the retention of their fingerprints and DNA samples and the fact that they are being used in . .
At First Instance – Marper v United Kingdom; S v United Kingdom ECHR 16-Jan-2007
Decision as to admissibility – the applicants complained of the retention by police of DNA and fingerprint samples and records.
Held: Admissible. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Police, Human Rights

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.168121

Ahmut v The Netherlands: ECHR 28 Nov 1996

The bond between natural parents and their children is a strong indicator of the existence of family life: ‘from the moment of the child’s birth and by the very fact of it, there exists between him and his parents a bond amounting to ‘family life’, which subsequent events cannot break save in exceptional circumstances’.

Citations:

(1997) 24 EHRR 62, 21702/93, [1996] ECHR 61, [1996] ECHR 102

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

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 – MM (Lebanon) and Others, Regina (on The Applications of) v Secretary of State and Another SC 22-Feb-2017
Challenge to rules requiring certain minimum levels of income (Minimum Income Requirement – MIR) for allowing entry for non-EEA spouse.
Held: The challenges udder the Human Rights Act to the Rules themselves failed. Nor did any separate issue . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.165466

Dupate v Latvia: ECHR 19 Nov 2020

ECHR Judgment : Right to respect for private and family life : Fifth Section
Articles aimed solely at satisfying the curiosity of a particular readership regarding the details of a person’s private life, however well-known that person might be, cannot be deemed to contribute to any debate of general interest in society.

Citations:

18068/11, [2020] ECHR 819

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – HRH The Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd ChD 11-Feb-2021
Defence had no prospect of success – Struck Out
The claimant complained that the defendant newspaper had published contents from a letter she had sent to her father. The court now considered her claims in breach of privacy and copyright, and her request for summary judgment.
Held: Warby J . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.656512

Ali and Another v Channel 5 Broadcasting Ltd: CA 16 Apr 2019

The claimant’s eviction had been filmed and broadcast by the defendants. They succeeded in an award of pounds 10,000 damages for breach of their rights of privacy. The parties cross appealed against the sum awarded and the finding respectively.
Held: Both appeals failed.
Where there is a rational view by which publication can be justified in the public interest, a court must give full weight to editorial knowledge and discretion, and be slow to interfere

Judges:

Irwin LJ

Citations:

[2019] EWCA Civ 677

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Ali and Another v Channel 5 Broadcast Ltd ChD 22-Feb-2018
The claimants said that a filming of their eviction from property was an invasion of their privacy.
Held: The Claimants did have a reasonable expectation of privacy in respect of the information included in the Programme about which they . .
See Also – Ali and Another v Channel 5 Broadcast Ltd ChD 19-Apr-2018
Decision as to costs after findings of misuse of private information . .

Cited by:

Cited – ZXC v Bloomberg Lp CA 15-May-2020
Privacy Expecation during police investigations
Appeal from a judgment finding that the Defendant had breached the Claimant’s privacy rights. He made an award of damages for the infraction of those rights and granted an injunction restraining Bloomberg from publishing information which further . .
Cited – HRH The Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers Ltd ChD 11-Feb-2021
Defence had no prospect of success – Struck Out
The claimant complained that the defendant newspaper had published contents from a letter she had sent to her father. The court now considered her claims in breach of privacy and copyright, and her request for summary judgment.
Held: Warby J . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Media, Information, Human Rights

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.635952

AM and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and others: CA 17 Mar 2009

The claimants complained of their detention after the disorder at Harmondsworth Immigration Detention Centre.
Held: The investigation of allegations of inhuman or degrading treatment related to those in the custody of the State, though it was run by an independent company, and was required to satisfy the requirements of Article 3. (Longmore LJ dissenting)
Sedley LJ said: ‘A body of European and domestic case-law has established that, when there is credible evidence of a breach of art. 2, the state has an obligation to provide or to institute an effective official investigation. The purposes of such an investigation were described by Lord Bingham in R (Amin) v Home Secretary [2004] 1 AC 653, ss31: ‘to ensure so far as possible that the full facts are brought to light; that culpable and discreditable conduct is exposed and brought to public notice; that suspicion of deliberate wrongdoing (if unjustified) is allayed; that dangerous practices and procedures are rectified; and that those who have lost their relative may at least have the satisfaction of knowing that lessons learnt from his death may save the lives of others.”
and: ‘ECtHR jurisprudence establishes the following of any art. 3 investigation:
The investigation should be capable of leading to the identification and punishment of those responsible;
It may generally be regarded as necessary for the persons responsible for and carrying out the investigation to be independent from those implicated in the events. This means not only a lack of hierarchical or institutional connection but also a practical independence;
It must be effective in the sense that it is capable of leading to a determination of whether the force used was or was not justified in the circumstances;
It must be thorough, in that the authorities must make a serious attempt to find out what happened and should not rely on hasty or ill-founded conclusions to close their investigation or as the basis of their decisions. They must take all reasonable steps available to them to secure the evidence concerning the incident; and
It must permit effective access for the complainant to the investigatory procedure.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Sedley, Lord Justice Longmore and Lord Justice Elias

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 219, [2009] ACD 38

Links:

Bailii, Times

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 2 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Amin, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 16-Oct-2003
Prisoner’s death – need for full public enquiry
The deceased had been a young Asian prisoner. He was placed in a cell overnight with a prisoner known to be racist, extremely violent and mentally unstable. He was killed. The family sought an inquiry into the death.
Held: There had been a . .

Cited by:

Cited – M, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Home Department Admn 2-Dec-2010
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Immigration

Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.321825

A v B: CA 18 Feb 2009

The claimant a former senior member of the Security Services sought to challenge a decision refusing permission to pulish his memoirs in full. The respondent argues that the Investigatory Powers Tribunal had exclusive jurisdiction. The respondent appealed against a decision saying that the High Court had jurisdiction also.
Held: The appeal succeeded (Rix LJ dissenting)

Judges:

Laws and Dyson LJJ, Rix LJ dissenting

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 24, [2009] 3 WLR 717, [2009] 3 All ER 416, [2009] ACD 39

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – A v B; Regina (A) v Director of Establishments of the Security Service Admn 4-Jul-2008
The claimant a retired senior officer in the intelligence services wished to publish a book of his memoirs. He was refused permission for his duty of confidentiality, and said that this infringed his human rights. The Director denied his right to . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – A, Regina (on The Application of) v B; Regina (A) v Director of Establishments of the Security Service SC 9-Dec-2009
B, a former senior member of the security services wished to publish his memoirs. He was under contractual and statutory obligations of confidentiality. He sought judicial review of a decision not to allow him to publish parts of the book, saying it . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Media, Armed Forces

Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.293905

Frodl v Austria: ECHR 8 Jan 2009

Admissibility

Judges:

Christos Rozakis, P

Citations:

20201/04, [2009] ECHR 225

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Cited by:

Admissibility – Frodl v Austria ECHR 8-Apr-2010
The applicant alleged that his disenfranchisement because he was serving a term of imprisonment of more than one year constituted a breach of his rights under Article 3 of Protocol No. 1. . .
Admissibility – Helmut Frodl v Austria ECHR 14-Sep-2011
Execution of judgment . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 23 July 2022; Ref: scu.291816