Category: Human Rights

McKenna v Her Majesty’s Advocate: ScHC 30 Dec 1999

The appellant was charged with murder. A witness had since died, and he objected to the introduction of his written statement, on the basis that this would infringe his right to a fair trial. The evidence was likely to be decisive.
Held: The fairness of the trial had to be considered as a whole. There was no basis in authority that admission of the evidence would necessarily prejudice the right to a fair trial.

Judges:

Lord Justice General and Lord Penrose and Lord Sutherland

Citations:

[1999] ScotHC 253

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 259(5), European Convention on Human Rights 6.1 6.3

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

Cited – Docherty v H M Advocate 1945
At trial, the judge had failed to make clear to the jury that the conviction of the appellant on a charge of murder depended on whether there was satisfactory proof of having acted in concert with others.
Held: Lord Moncrieff commented on an . .
Cited – AGL and EDB v H M Advocate 1988
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Human Rights

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.164548

Bennett v Commissioners of Customs and Excise (No 2): ChD 27 Feb 2001

There was nothing to prevent the Commissioners withdrawing one assessment and replacing it with another even after an adjudication on the first by a tribunal, but they could not do this in such a way as to attempt to relitigate the issues determined.

Citations:

Gazette 29-Mar-2001, Times 27-Feb-2001

Statutes:

Value Added Tax Act 1994 73, Human Rights Act 1998

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Human Rights, VAT

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.78340

O v Crown Court at Harrow: HL 26 Jul 2006

The claimant said that his continued detention after the custody time limits had expired was an infringement of his human rights. He faced continued detention having been refused bail because of his arrest on a grave charge, having a previous conviction for another grave offence.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. Insofar as the the word ‘satisfied’ implied a burden of evidence on the defendant, the Act should be read own under the 1998 Act so that any burden of evidence lay on the prosecution, so as not to create an interference with the defendant’s human rights. That being done, the appeal failed.
Lord Brown of Underheaton: ‘in the vast majority of cases the court will reach a clear view one way or the other whether the conditions for withholding bail specified by Schedule 1 to the Bail Act are satisfied. But just occasionally the court will be left unsure as to whether the defendant should be released on bail-the only situation in which the burden of proof assumes any relevance-and in my judgment bail would then have to be granted. That must be the default position. Section 25 should in my judgment be read down to make that plain. ‘
Lord Carswell: ‘The two key requirements imposed by article 5(3) are, first, that the prosecution must bear the overall burden of justifying a remand in custody-it must advance good and sufficient public interest reasons outweighing the presumption of innocence and the general presumption in favour of liberty; and, secondly, that the judge must be entitled to take account of all relevant considerations pointing for and against the grant of bail so as to exercise effective and meaningful judicial control over pre-trial detention. ‘

Judges:

Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Hutton, Baroness Hale of Richmond, Lord Carswell, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood

Citations:

[2006] UKHL 42, [2006] 3 WLR 195, [2007] 1 AC 249

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 25, European Convention on Human Rights 5(3), Prosecution of Offences (Custody Time Limits) Regulations 1987 (SI 1987/299)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina (Sim) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 11-Feb-2003
The defendant had been convicted of a serious offence involving violece or sex, and been made subject to a extended sentence. He had been released on licence but recalled, and now challenged the system under which it had been decided that he should . .
Cited – Ilijkov v Bulgaria ECHR 26-Jul-2001
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 5-3; Violation of Art. 5-4; Violation of Art. 6-1; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention . .
Cited – Regina v Lichniak HL 25-Nov-2002
The appellants challenged the mandatory sentence of life imprisonment imposed on them on their convictions for murder. They said it was an infringement of their Human Rights, being arbitrary and disproportionate.
Held: The case followed on . .
Cited – Caballero v United Kingdom ECHR 29-Feb-2000
Provisions were in place which said that a person charged with a very serious crime of violence having once been convicted previously of rape or murder he was to be refused bail automatically. Although the provision had later been altered, the . .
Cited – Regina v Offen; Regina v McGuillard; Regina v McKeown; Regina v Okwuegbunam; Regina v Saunders (Stephen) CACD 15-Nov-2000
For the purposes of the Act, where a defendant faced a compulsory life sentence following two convictions for certain offences, a finding by the judge that the defendant did not pose a serious risk to society, could be an exceptional circumstance . .
Cited – McClean, Re HL 7-Jul-2005
The appellant was serving a life sentence for terrorist offences. He complained that he should have been released under the 1998 Act. It was said he would be a danger to the public if released. On pre-release home leave he was involved in a . .
Cited – Hutchison Reid v The United Kingdom ECHR 20-Feb-2003
The applicant had been detained over many years after committing offences of a sexual and violent nature. After one release he reoffended and was re-detained after completing his sentence. He challenged the basis of his continued detention.
Cited – Clingham (formerly C (a minor)) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea; Regina v Crown Court at Manchester Ex parte McCann and Others HL 17-Oct-2002
The applicants had been made subject of anti-social behaviour orders. They challenged the basis upon which the orders had been made.
Held: The orders had no identifiable consequences which would make the process a criminal one. Civil standards . .
Cited – Stogmuller v Austria ECHR 10-Nov-1969
Hudoc Violation of Art. 5-3; Just satisfaction reserved
The court contrasted the stipulation in article 6(1)-the general requirement for a hearing of any proceedings, civil or criminal, ‘within a reasonable . .
Cited – Regina v Leeds Crown Court, Ex parte Bagoutie 31-May-1999
Lord Bingham: ‘The court made plain in Ex p McDonald, as indeed is plain on the face of the statute, that when seeking an extension or a further extension of the custody time limit the Crown must show that there is good and sufficient [reason] for . .
Cited – Regina (Gibson and Another) v Winchester Crown Court QBD 24-Feb-2004
The defendant challenged extension of the custody time limit, saying that the prosecuting authorities had not acted with due diligence to take the case forward.
Held: Though the prosecutor had not acted as required, in this case the actual . .
Cited – SBC v The United Kingdom ECHR 19-Jun-2001
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 5-3; Violation of Art. 5-5; No violation of Art. 13
The respondent government conceded that the absolute ban on the grant of bail to section 25 . .
Cited – Punzelt v The Czech Republic ECHR 25-Apr-2000
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 5-3 with regard to length of detention; No violation of Art. 5-3 with regard to refusal of bail; No violation of Art. 6-1; Pecuniary damage – claim . .
Cited – Contrada v Italy ECHR 24-Aug-1998
The court rejected a complaint under article 5(3). The court said: ‘The right of an accused in detention to have his case examined with particular expedition must not hinder the efforts of the courts to carry out their tasks with proper care . . In . .
Cited – Grisez v Belgique ECHR 26-Sep-2002
The court held that ‘the medical experts did actually cause a certain amount of delay in the conduct of the proceedings,’ and rejected the complaint under article 5(3): ‘[T]he delay due to the medical reports, although improper, does not in itself . .
Cited – Regina v Kansal (2) HL 29-Nov-2001
The prosecutor had lead and relied at trial on evidence obtained by compulsory questioning under the 1986 Act.
Held: In doing so the prosecutor was acting to give effect to section 433.
The decision in Lambert to disallow retrospective . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Prisons, Human Rights

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.243433

Dr D, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health: CA 19 Jul 2006

The doctor complained of the use of Alert letters where he was suspected of sexual abuse of patients, but the allegations were unsubstantiated. He complained particularly that he had been acquitted in a criminal court and then also by the professional conduct committee of the GMC.
Held: There had been very poor administration of the issue of the letter, but the failures did not assist the claimant. The core submission was that the charge having been dismissed by the committee, it was unlawful to issue the letter on the same basis: ‘the more serious a public authority’s interference with an individual’s interests, the more substantial will be the justification which the court will require if the interference is to be permitted. ‘ There was in this case a pressing need to inform the employer that 6 women had separately made accusations against the doctor, even though no convictions had followed.

Judges:

Ward LJ, Laws LJ, Longmore LJ

Citations:

Times 28-Aug-2006, [2006] EWCA Civ 989

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Chief Constable of North Wales Police and Others Ex Parte Thorpe and Another; Regina v Chief Constable for North Wales Police Area and others ex parte AB and CB CA 18-Mar-1998
Public Identification of Pedophiles by Police
AB and CB had been released from prison after serving sentences for sexual assaults on children. They were thought still to be dangerous. They moved about the country to escape identification, and came to be staying on a campsite. The police sought . .
Cited – Regina (X) v Chief Constable of West Midlands Police CA 30-Jul-2004
The claimant had been accused of offences, but the prosecution had been discontinued when the child victims had failed to identify him. The police had nevertheless notified potential employers and he had been unable to obtain work as a social . .
Appeal from – Dr D v The Secretary of State for Health Admn 13-Dec-2005
There had been a series of unsubstantiated allegations against the doctor of sexual abuse of patients. He challenge the issue of an Alert Letter under the 1977 Act when further allegations were made. The complainants were not capable of giving . .
Cited – Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation CA 10-Nov-1947
Administrative Discretion to be Used Reasonably
The applicant challenged the manner of decision making as to the conditions which had been attached to its licence to open the cinema on Sundays. It had not been allowed to admit children under 15 years of age. The statute provided no appeal . .
Cited – In Re V (Minors) (Sexual Abuse: Disclosure); In Re L (Sexual Abuse; Disclosure) CA 8-Oct-1998
In each case the local authority involved in care proceedings sought to disclose to others (another authority and the football league), information which had come to light regarding sexual improprieties of the parties to the cases. It was . .
Cited – Mullen, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 29-Apr-2004
The claimant had been imprisoned, but his conviction was later overturned. He had been a victim of a gross abuse of executive power. The British authorities had acted in breach of international law and had been guilty of ‘a blatant and extremely . .
Cited – Regina v Local Authority and Police Authority in the Midlands ex parte LM 2000
The applicant owned a bus company whose contract with the local education authority for the provision of school bus services was terminated after the disclosure by the police and the social services department of a past investigation into an . .
Cited – Hammern v Norway ECHR 11-Feb-2003
The claimant was acquitted by a jury at trial and he then sought compensation for the period of his detention on remand. The test applied was whether ‘it is shown to be probable that he did not perform the act that formed the basis for the charge’. . .
Cited – Regina v Z (Prior acquittal) HL 22-Jun-2000
The defendant on a charge of rape had been tried and acquitted of the rape of different women on three previous occasions in three separate trials. The prosecution wished to call those three complainants to give similar fact evidence in support of . .
Cited – PG and JH v The United Kingdom ECHR 25-Sep-2001
The use of covert listening devices within a police station was an infringement of the right to privacy, since there was no system of law regulating such practices. That need not affect the right to a fair trial. The prosecution had a duty to . .
Cited – Regina (A) v Chief Constable of C QBD 2001
The court considered the disclosure of unproved allegations as between police forces. Police authorities had disclosed information concerning the claimant to each other and in one case to a local authority. The information related to allegations of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health Professions, Human Rights, Administrative

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.243321

Sinclair Gardens Investments (Kensington) Ltd v Wang and others: LT 7 Jul 2006

LANDLORD AND TENANT – services charges – Section27A Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 as introduced by Section 155 Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 which came into force on 30 September 2003 – the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 (Commencement No. 2 and Savings) England) Order 2003 – whether on an application made to a Leasehold Valuation Tribunal after 30 September 2003 the provisions of Section 27A(2) and (5) apply so as to enable LVT to exercise jurisdiction under Section 27A notwithstanding that the service charges claimed by the landlord were paid by the tenant before commencement date – Article 1 of the First Protocol of the European Convention on Human Rights – abuse of process.

Citations:

[2006] EWLands LRX – 89 – 2005

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant, Human Rights

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.243176

Hirst v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 6 Jul 2006

The prisoner had been released on licence but then recalled. He complained that the procedure infringed his human rights. He had been convicted of manslaughter, and was seen to be a long term danger. The court awarded him compensation saying that the parole board had unduly delayed in informing him of the reasons for his recall, and in providing him with a copy of the dossier relating to the decision, but rejected other submissions. He now said that the section allowed imposition of an arbitrary decision of the executive, where it should be a judicial one.
Held: The appeal failed. The ‘appellant’s recall was justified in law by the link between the discretionary sentence of life imprisonment imposed following his conviction for manslaughter and his behaviour during the short period while he was living in the community on licence. This gave rise to realistic concerns for public safety. These considerations underpin the statutory scheme in section 32, which, no doubt with the decisions of the European Court in mind, was designed to protect the public from the risk of harm consistently with the entitlements provided for the appellant by article 5. Far from creating hesitation with the legitimacy of such processes, the jurisprudence of the European Court endorses them. ‘

Judges:

Sir Igor Judge, President, Scott LJ, Hallett LJ

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 945, Times 12-Jul-2006

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 5, Crime (Sentences) Act 1997 32

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Hirst, Regina (on the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another Admn 21-Jun-2005
Challenge to recall of lifer to prison after release on licence. . .
Cited – Weeks v The United Kingdom ECHR 2-Mar-1987
The applicant, aged 17, was convicted of armed robbery and sentenced to life imprisonment in the interests of public safety, being considered by the trial judge on appeal to be dangerous.
Held: ‘The court agrees with the Commission and the . .
Cited – Waite v The United Kingdom ECHR 10-Dec-2002
The claimant had been sentenced to be detained at Her Majesty’s pleasure when a youth. After release on licence, the Parole Board met and revoked that licence without an oral hearing, and in contravention of the rules. He did not dispute the facts . .
Cited – Stafford v The United Kingdom ECHR 28-May-2002
Grand Chamber – The appellant claimed damages for being held in prison beyond the term of his sentence. Having been released on licence from a life sentence for murder, he was re-sentenced for a cheque fraud. He was not released after the end of the . .
Cited – Regina (Noorkoiv) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another CA 30-May-2002
The claimant was a prisoner. He became entitled to be considered for release on parole, but was not released because the Parole Board had not made a decision.
Held: The system for consideration of the release of discretionary and life . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Prisons, Human Rights

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.242993

Clayton v Clayton: CA 27 Jun 2006

The family had been through protracted family law proceedings and had been subject to orders restricting identification. The father now wanted to discuss his experiences and to campaign. He could not do so without his child being identified.
Held: The protection given by the order against identification of the child did not continue beyond the end of the proceedings unless the effect was required under the 1960 Act. The interests of the children remained paramount, but had to be balanced against the need for open justice. That did not mean that the identity of a child need always be protected.

Judges:

Potter P, Lady Justice Arden DBE Lord Justice Wall

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 878, Times 04-Jul-2006, [2006] 3 WLR 599, [2006] Fam 83

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 97, Administration of Justice Act 1970 12, European Convention on Human Rights 8 10

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Oneryildiz v Turkey ECHR 30-Nov-2004
(Grand Chamber) The applicant had lived with his family in a slum bordering on a municipal household refuse tip. A methane explosion at the tip resulted in a landslide which engulfed the applicant’s house killing his close relatives.
Held: The . .
Cited – Pelling v Bruce-Williams, Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs intervening CA 5-Jul-2004
The applicant sought an order that his application for a joint residence order should be held in public.
Held: Though there was some attractiveness in the applicant’s arguments, the issue had been fully canvassed by the ECHR. The time had come . .
Cited – P-B (a Minor) (child cases: hearings in open court) CA 20-Jun-1996
The applicant sought to have his application for a residence order heard in open court: ‘Article 6 (1) provides for the public hearing and the public pronouncement of judgment of cases, but with the proviso of exclusion of the press and the public . .
Cited – Scott v Scott HL 5-May-1913
Presumption in Favour of Open Proceedings
There had been an unauthorised dissemination by the petitioner to third parties of the official shorthand writer’s notes of a nullity suit which had been heard in camera. An application was made for a committal for contempt.
Held: The House . .
Cited – Allan v Clibbery (1) CA 30-Jan-2002
Save in cases involving children and ancillary and other situations requiring it, cases in the family division were not inherently private. The appellant failed to obtain an order that details of an action under the section should not be disclosed . .

Cited by:

Cited – Norfolk County Council v Webster and others FD 1-Nov-2006
The claimants wished to claim that they were victims of a miscarriage of justice in the way the Council had dealt with care proceedings. They sought that the proceedings should be reported without the children being identified.
Held: A judge . .
Cited – British Broadcasting Corporation v CAFCASS Legal and others FD 30-Mar-2007
Parents of a child had resisted care proceedings, and now wished the BBC to be able to make a TV programme about their case. They applied to the court for the judgment to be released. Applications were also made to have a police officer’s and . .
Cited – Doctor A and Others v Ward and Another FD 8-Jan-2010
Parents wished to publicise the way care proceedings had been handled, naming the doctors, social workers and experts some of whom had been criticised. Their names had been shown as initials so far, and interim contra mundum orders had been made . .
Cited – TSE and ELP v News Group Newspapers Ltd QBD 23-May-2011
The claimants had obtained an injunction preventing publication of details of their private lives and against being publicly named. The newspaper had not attempted to raise any public interest defence. Various publications had taken place to breach . .
Cited – Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council v Haigh FD 22-Aug-2011
The Council sought to have certain aspects of a care application put into the public domain which would normally have remained private. Application was also made (by the father and the child) for an order restricting the right of the mother to make . .
Cited – H v A (No2) FD 17-Sep-2015
The court had previously published and then withdrawn its judgment after third parties had been able to identify those involved by pulling together media and internet reports with the judgment.
Held: The judgment case should be published in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Children, Human Rights, Media

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.242896

Countryside Alliance and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Attorney General Another, Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: CA 23 Jun 2006

The claimants sought to challenge the validity of the 2004 Act under human rights law and on European law grounds. A variety of effects of the Act were alleged. It was said that it would prevent landowners enjoying their own land, and that the Act would prevent people enjoying their private lives. It was also said that it interfered with the claimants’ EC rights to trade freely.
Held: The aims of the legislation which were to prevent cruelty were legitimate and proportionate. At its highest the ban restricted certain limited forms of certain activities. Any infringement was legitimate and proportionate.

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 817, Times 30-Jun-2006, [2006] EWCA Civ 1096, [2006] 3 WLR 1017, [2007] Eu LR 139, [2007] QB 305, [2006] HRLR 33, [2006] UKHRR 927

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Statutes:

Hunting Act 2004

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal From – Countryside Alliance and others v HM Attorney General and others Admn 29-Jul-2005
The various claimants sought to challenge the 2004 Act by way of judicial review on the grounds that it was ‘a disproportionate, unnecessary and illegitimate interference with their rights to choose how they conduct their lives, and with market . .

Cited by:

Cited – Wright and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health Secretary of State for Education and Skills Admn 16-Nov-2006
The various applicants sought judicial review of the operation of the Protection of Vulnerable Adults List insofar as they had been placed provisionally on the list, preventing them from finding work. One complaint was that the list had operated . .
Cited – L, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Another CA 1-Mar-2007
The court considered the proper content of an enhanced criminal record certificate. The claimant said that it should contain only matter relating to actual or potential criminal activity.
Held: As to the meaning of section 115: ‘if Parliament . .
Appeal From – Countryside Alliance and others, Regina (on the Application of) v Attorney General and Another HL 28-Nov-2007
The appellants said that the 2004 Act infringed their rights under articles 8 11 and 14 and Art 1 of protocol 1.
Held: Article 8 protected the right to private and family life. Its purpose was to protect individuals from unjustified intrusion . .
Cited – Countryside Alliance and others, Regina (on the Application of) v Attorney General and Another HL 28-Nov-2007
The appellants said that the 2004 Act infringed their rights under articles 8 11 and 14 and Art 1 of protocol 1.
Held: Article 8 protected the right to private and family life. Its purpose was to protect individuals from unjustified intrusion . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 07 July 2022; Ref: scu.242695

Dickson and Another v United Kingdom: ECHR 18 Apr 2006

The applicants were husband and wife who wanted infertility treatment by IVF. Mr Dickson as a prisoner, and they complained that the refusal of facilities was an interference in their right to family life as a refusal to fulfil a positive obligation.
Held: No breach was established. The requirements for compliance with article 8 were not clear cut, and facilities varied widely through the EU. The policy was to allow IVF for serving prisoners in exceptional circumstances, and was justified by welfare concerns and the maintenance of public confidence. The application had been carefully considered and could not be shown to be arbitrary or unreasonable.

Citations:

44362/04, Times 16-May-2006, [2006] ECHR 430, [2007] ECHR 17, [2011] ECHR 1662

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii, Bailii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Mellor CA 4-Apr-2001
A prisoner had no right to facilities to artificially inseminate his wife. In this case, he might not be released for several years, and there were no medical reasons advanced for finding exceptional reasons under the Department policy. Provided the . .

Cited by:

See Also – Dickson and Another v United Kingdom ECHR 15-Dec-2007
(Grand Chamber) The complainants were husband and wife. They had been married whilst the husband served a sentence of life imprisonment. They had been refused suport for artificial insemination treatment.
Held: The claim succeeded. The refusal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Prisons, Health

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.242614

Regina v G: CACD 12 Apr 2006

The defendant pleaded guilty to the rape of a twelve year old girl on the agreed basis that he had believed her to be 15, but had been advised that given her age, his belief was immaterial. He now appealed saying that the presumption infringed his human rights.
Held: The question was whether the section conflicted with the presumption of innocence. If it did it could be written down to become compliant. It was necessary to retain the distinction between innocence of criminal conduct and innocence of blameworthy conduct.The section did not infinge the defendant’s human rights, and the section did not require to be read down.

Judges:

Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers LCJ, Andrew Smith J, Wilkie J

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Crim 821, [2006] 1 WLR 2052, [2007] 1 Lloyds Rep IR 186, [2006] All ER (D) 185, [2006] 1 Lloyds Rep 500, [2006] Crim LR 930

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Sexual Offences Act 2003 5, European Convention on Human Rights 6.2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Sheldrake v Director of Public Prosecutions; Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002 HL 14-Oct-2004
Appeals were brought complaining as to the apparent reversal of the burden of proof in road traffic cases and in cases under the Terrorism Acts. Was a legal or an evidential burden placed on a defendant?
Held: Lord Bingham of Cornhill said: . .
Cited – Salabiaku v France ECHR 7-Oct-1988
A Zairese national living in Paris, went to the airport to collect, as he said, a parcel of foodstuffs sent from Africa. He could not find this, but was shown a locked trunk, which he was advised to leave alone. He however took possession of it, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Human Rights

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.242609

Karni v Sweden: ECHR 8 Mar 1988

(Commission) The applicant was a doctor who, on his return to Sweden, was entered on the list of those affiliated to the Social Security System which meant he could carry on a private medical practice and receive payment for treatment provided to those who might otherwise not be able to pay. New rules meant that he was removed from the list and so the investments he had made in equipment were lost and his practice closed down. The Commission decided that the loss of his affiliation did not amount to deprivation of a possession since he would, at least in theory, continue to practise with patients who would pay. But the Commission considered that ‘the vested interests in the applicant’s medical practice may be regarded as ‘possessions’ within the meaning of Article 1PI’. It said: ‘The question of affiliation to the Social Insurance system was a decisive element for the running of the practice.’

Citations:

11540/88, (1988) 55 DR 157

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Malik, Regina (on the Application of) v Waltham Forest PCT and Secretary of State for Health Admn 17-Mar-2006
The doctor had been suspended on full pay whilst allegations against him were investigated. He claimed that the suspension infringed his human rights and that his licence to practice was a possession.
Held: At the disciplinary proceedings: . .
Cited – Murungaru v Secretary of State for the Home Department and others CA 12-Sep-2008
The claimant was a former Kenyan minister. He had been visiting the UK for medical treatment. His visas were cancelled on the basis that his presence was not conducive to the public good. Public Interest Immunity certificates had been issued to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Health Professions

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.242446

A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, Mahmoud Abu Rideh Jamal Ajouaou v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 11 Aug 2004

The claimants had each been detained without trial for more than two years, being held as suspected terrorists. They were free leave to return to their own countries, but they feared for their lives if returned. They complained that the evidence used to justify their detention was derived from practices involving torture by the US and others.
Held: UNCAT required a state not to admit evidence shown to have been obtained by torture, however there was no sufficient evidence before the Commission to conclude that it had indeed been obtained by torture. Challenges to evidence on this ground go as to weight, not admissibility. The derogation from the European Convention was lawful, and UNCAT has no direct effect in English law. ‘This case has concerned the means by which, in the acute setting created by the threat to the life of the nation which currently faces the United Kingdom, the State has sought to reconcile competing constitutional fundamentals. I do not say it has been done perfectly, or could not have been done better. But I do not think the executive or the legislature has at all lost sight of those constitutional principles which it is the court’s special duty to protect: the rule of law, and the avoidance of arbitrary power. ‘ The Rules explicitly disallowed any argument for exclusion of the evidence, because it stated that otherwise inadmissible evidence was to be allowed. There was no high duty on the Secretary of State to investigate allegations that evidence had been obtained by torture. (Neuberger LJ dissenting) Given the danger that the admission of such evidence might encourage the practice of torture and the inherent inability properly to test it, the evidence should be inadmissible.

Judges:

Lord Justice Pill Lord Justice Laws Lord Justice Neuberger

Citations:

Times 05-Oct-2004, [2004] EWCA Civ 1123, [2005] 1 WLR 414

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 5, Human Rights Act 1998 (Designated Derogation) Order 2001, Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001, Special Immigration Appeals Commission (Procedure) Rules 2003 44(3), United Nations Convention Against Torture 1984 15

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – A, X and Y, and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 25-Oct-2002
The applicant challenged regulations brought in by the respondent providing for foreigners suspected of terrorism to be detained where a British national suspect would not have been detained. The respondent had issued a derogation from the . .
Cited – Secretary of State for the Home Department v Rehman HL 11-Oct-2001
The applicant, a Pakistani national had entered the UK to act as a Muslim priest. The Home Secretary was satisfied that he was associated with a Muslim terrorist organisation, and refused indefinite leave to remain. The Home Secretary provided both . .
Cited – Chahal v The United Kingdom ECHR 15-Nov-1996
Proper Reply Opportunity Required on Deportation
(Grand Chamber) The claimant was an Indian citizen who had been granted indefinite leave to remain in this country but whose activities as a Sikh separatist brought him to the notice of the authorities both in India and here. The Home Secretary of . .
Cited – The Secretary of State for the Home Department v M CA 18-Mar-2004
The applicant had been detained under the appellant’s certificate that he was a suspected terrorist.
Held: The fact that there were suspicions surrounding the detainee did not mean that those suspicions were necessarily reasonable suspicions . .
Cited – O’Hara v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary HL 21-Nov-1996
Second Hand Knowledge Supports Resaobnable Belief
The plaintiff had been arrested on the basis of the 1984 Act. The officer had no particular knowledge of the plaintiff’s involvement, relying on a briefing which led to the arrest.
Held: A reasonable suspicion upon which an arrest was founded . .
Cited – Ferrantelli and Santangelo v Italy ECHR 7-Aug-1996
The matter of admissibility of evidence is primarily one for the national courts: ‘It [the Court] recalls that the admissibility of evidence is primarily a matter for regulation by national law and, as a rule, it is for the national courts to assess . .
Cited – Ibrahim v The King PC 6-Mar-1914
(Hong Kong) The defendant was an Afghan subject with the British Army in Hong Kong. He was accused of murder. Having accepted the protection of the British Armed forces, he became subject to their laws. In custody, he was asked about the offence by . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Ping Lin PC 1976
The Board was asked whether a statement by the defendant was shown to be voluntary.
Held: A trial Judge faced by the problem should approach the task in a common sense way and should ask himself whether the prosecution had proved that the . .
Cited – Regina v Hnedish 1958
(Canada) ‘Having regard to all the implications involved in accepting the full impact of the Hammond decision [1941] 3 All ER 318 which can, I think, be summarised by saying that regardless of how much physical or mental torture or abuse has been . .
Cited – Regina v Horseferry Road Magistrates’ Court, ex Parte Bennett (No 1) HL 24-Jun-1993
The defendant had been brought to the UK in a manner which was in breach of extradition law. He had, in effect, been kidnapped by the authorities.
Held: The High Court may look at how an accused person was brought within the jurisdiction when . .
Cited – Wong Kam-Ming v The Queen PC 20-Dec-1978
The voir dire system allows a defendant to give his evidence on the limited issues surrounding the circumstances under which his statement was made as to the admissibility of the confession, without infringing his right to elect not to give evidence . .
Cited – Regina v Latif; Regina v Shahzad HL 23-Jan-1996
The defendant had been lured into the UK by the unlawful acts of customs officers. He claimed abuse of process.
Held: The category of cases in which the abuse of process principles can be applied is not closed. A customs officer committing an . .
Cited – Regina v Sang HL 25-Jul-1979
The defendant appealed against an unsuccessful application to exclude evidence where it was claimed there had been incitement by an agent provocateur.
Held: The appeal failed. There is no defence of entrapment in English law. All evidence . .
Cited – Ramda, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 27-Jun-2002
The Government of France sought the extradition of Ramda wanted by them for trial in connection with a series of terrorist bombings in France. The applicant resisted extradition to France on the ground that the evidence which would be relied on . .
Cited – Regina v Looseley (orse Loosely); Attorney General’s Reference No 3 of 2000 HL 25-Oct-2001
Police Entrapment is no defence to Criminal Act
The defendant complained of his conviction for supplying controlled drugs, saying that the undercover police officer had requested him to make the supply.
Held: It was an abuse of process for the police to go so far as to incite a crime.
Cited – Montgomery and Coulter v Her Majesty’s Advocate PC 19-Oct-2000
The test of whether a defendant’s common law right to a fair trial had been damaged by pre-trial publicity was similar to the test under the Convention, and also where there was any plea of oppression. The substantial difference is that no balancing . .
Cited – Regina v Bartle and Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Others, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte; Regina v Evans and Similar (No 3) HL 24-Mar-1999
An application to extradite a former head of state for an offence which was not at the time an offence under English law would fail, but could proceed in respect of allegations of acts after that time. No immunity was intended for heads of state. . .
Cited – Regina v Lyons, Parnes, Ronson, Saunders HL 15-Nov-2002
The defendants had been convicted on evidence obtained from them by inspectors with statutory powers to require answers on pain of conviction. Subsequently the law changed to find such activity an infringement of a defendant’s human rights.
Cited – Attorney-General v Guardian Newspapers Ltd (No 2) (‘Spycatcher’) HL 13-Oct-1988
Loss of Confidentiality Protection – public domain
A retired secret service employee sought to publish his memoirs from Australia. The British government sought to restrain publication there, and the defendants sought to report those proceedings, which would involve publication of the allegations . .
Cited – Saleem v Secretary of State for Home Department CA 13-Jun-2000
A rule which deemed service on an asylum applicant two days after postage of a special adjudicator’s determination irrespective of whether it was in fact received was outside the powers given to the Secretary, and is of no effect. The Act gave power . .
Cited – JH Rayner (Mincing Lane) Ltd v Department of Trade and Industry HL 1989
An undisclosed principal will not be permitted to claim to be party to a contract if this is contrary to the terms of the contract itself. Thus the provision in the standard form B contract of the London Metal Exchange ‘this contract is made between . .
Cited – Teixeira De Castro v Portugal ECHR 9-Jun-1998
Mr De Castro had been the target of an unwarranted, unauthorised, unsupervised police operation in which undercover officers incited him to supply drugs. He challenged a conviction for trafficking in heroin, based mainly on statements of two police . .
Cited – Stott (Procurator Fiscal, Dunfermline) and Another v Brown PC 5-Dec-2000
The system under which the registered keeper of a vehicle was obliged to identify herself as the driver, and such admission was to be used subsequently as evidence against her on a charge of driving with excess alcohol, was not a breach of her right . .
Cited – McElhinney v Ireland; Al-Adsani v United Kingdom; Fogarty v United Kingdom ECHR 21-Nov-2001
Grand Chamber – The first applicant said he had been injured by a shot fired by a British soldier who had been carried for two miles into the Republic of Ireland, clinging to the applicant’s vehicle following an incident at a checkpoint.
Held: . .
Cited – Regina v Director of Serious Fraud Office, ex Parte Smith HL 15-Jul-1992
The applicant having been cautioned for an offence under the Companies Act 1985, he objected to being required to answer questions put to him in connection with the matter by the Director of the Serious Fraud Office under the 1987 Act.
Held: . .
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 – Jones v University of Warwick CA 4-Feb-2003
The claimant appealed a decision to admit in evidence a tape recording, taken by an enquiry agent of the defendant who had entered her house unlawfully.
Held: The situation asked judges to reconcile the irreconcilable. Courts should be . .
Cited – McElhinney v Ireland; Al-Adsani v United Kingdom; Fogarty v United Kingdom ECHR 21-Nov-2001
Grand Chamber – The first applicant said he had been injured by a shot fired by a British soldier who had been carried for two miles into the Republic of Ireland, clinging to the applicant’s vehicle following an incident at a checkpoint.
Held: . .
Cited – Regina v Shannon (Also Known As Alford) CACD 11-Oct-2000
The defendant had been enticed to commit a crime involving supply of controlled drugs by a journalist acting as an agent provocateur.
Held: Entrapment is not a defence in UK law. It was open to the judge hearing the prosecution to exclude the . .

Cited by:

Cited – A and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department (No 2) HL 8-Dec-2005
Evidence from 3rd Party Torture Inadmissible
The applicants had been detained following the issue of certificates issued by the respondent that they posed a terrorist threat. They challenged the decisions of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission saying that evidence underlying the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.199951

Regina (on the application of Abassi and Another) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and Another: CA 6 Nov 2002

A British national had been captured in Afghanistan, and was being held without remedy by US forces. His family sought an order requiring the respondent to take greater steps to secure his release or provide other assistance.
Held: Such an order would question the legitimacy of the actions of a foreign sovereign state, and to adjudicate upon executive actions in the conduct of foreign affairs. The detention was objectionable. The court could provide no direct remedy, since the British government had no control nor active part in it. There was no legitimate expectation created which could support an application for judicial review of the actions of the respondent. The government could continue to make representations, but that must always be in the respondents discretion. The respondent had properly considered the requests, and no more could reasonably be expected.

Judges:

Phillips MR, Waller, Carnwath LJJ

Citations:

Times 08-Nov-2002, Gazette 06-Dec-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 1598, [2002] All ER (D) 70, [2003] UKHR 76

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Khera v Secretary of State for The Home Department; Khawaja v Secretary of State for The Home Department HL 10-Feb-1983
The appellant Khera’s father had obtained leave to settle in the UK. The appellant obtained leave to join him, but did not disclose that he had married. After his entry his wife in turn sought to join him. The appellant was detained as an illegal . .
Cited – Eisentrager v Forrestal 5-Jun-1949
(US Supreme Court) German citizens had been convicted of espionage by a United States military commission after the surrender of Germany at the end of the Second World War. They were repatriated to Landsberg Prison in Germany to serve their . .
Cited – Buck v Attorney General CA 2-Jan-1965
By an action for declaratory relief, a challenge was offered to the validity of the Order in Council giving effect to the 1961 Act.
Held: The appeal failed. As a matter of international comity an English court should not grant declarations . .
Cited – Buttes Gas and Oil Co v Hammer (No 3) HL 1981
In a defamation action, issues arose as to two conflicting oil concessions which neighbouring states in the Arabian Gulf had granted over their territorial and offshore waters. The foreign relations of the United Kingdom and Iran were also involved . .
Cited – Westland Helicopters Ltd v Arab Organisation for Industrialisation 1995
International arbitration proceedings under a joint venture agreement had led to an award in Westland’s favour against the Organisation. The award was converted into a judgment and Westland obtained garnishee orders nisi against six London banks. . .
Cited – British Airways Board v Laker Airways Limited HL 1985
The plaintiffs tried to restrain the defendant from pursuing an action in the US courts claiming that the plaintiffs had acted together in an unlawful conspiracy to undermine the defendant’s business.
Held: The action in the US were unlawful . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs ex parte British Council of Turkish Cypriot Associations and Another Admn 19-Mar-1998
The applicants sought judicial review of the respondent’s decision to support the application for admission to the Eurorpean Community of Cyprus.
Held: Leave was refused: ‘the independence of Cyprus since 17th August 1960 forecloses any power . .
Cited – In re Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Co Ltd (Belgium v Spain) (second phase) ICJ 5-Feb-1970
ICJ The claim arose out of the adjudication in bankruptcy in Spain of Barcelona Traction, a company incorporated in Canada. Its object was to seek reparation for damage alleged by Belgium to have been sustained . .
Cited – Oppenheimer v Cattermole (Inspector of Taxes) HL 5-Feb-1975
HL Income tax, Schedule D – Foreign possessions – Double taxation relief – German government pension for past services – Paid to British subject of German origin – Whether German nationality deemed to be retained . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, ex parte Pirbhai CA 1985
Sir John Donaldson MR said: ‘in the context of a situation with serious implications for the conduct of international relations, the courts should act with a high degree of circumspection in the interests of all concerned. It can rarely, if ever, be . .

Cited by:

Cited – Mohamed, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (No 1) Admn 21-Aug-2008
The claimant had been detained by the US in Guantanamo Bay suspected of terrorist involvement. He sought to support his defence documents from the respondent which showed that the evidence to be relied on in the US courts had been obtained by . .
Cited – Shergill and Others v Khaira and Others SC 11-Jun-2014
The parties disputed the trusts upon which three Gurdwaras (Sikh Temples) were held. The Court of Appeal had held that the issues underlying the dispute were to be found in matters of the faith of the Sikh parties, and had ordered a permanent stay. . .
Approved – Sandiford, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs SC 16-Jul-2014
The appellant a British Citizen awaited execution in Singapore after conviction on a drugs charge. The only way she might get legal help for a further appeal would be if she was given legal aid by the respondent. She sought assistance both on Human . .
Cited – Miller, Regina (On the Application Of) v The Prime Minister QBD 11-Sep-2019
Prorogation request was non-justiciable
The claimant sought to challenge the prorogation of Parliament by the Queen at the request of the respondent.
Held: The claim failed: ‘the decision of the Prime Minister to advise Her Majesty the Queen to prorogue Parliament is not justiciable . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Judicial Review, Constitutional

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.178026

Volaw Trust and Corporate Services Ltd and Others v The Office of The Comptroller of Taxes and Another: PC 17 Jun 2019

(From the Royal Court of Jersey and the Court of Appeal of Jersey) A number of questions about the scope and effect of the privilege against self-incrimination as it applies, first, under article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and secondly, under the customary law of Jersey.

Judges:

Lord Reed, Lord Kerr, Lord Sumption, Lord Carnwath, Lord Hodge, Lady Arden, Lord Kitchin

Citations:

[2019] UKPC 29

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Human Rights, Taxes Management

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.638487

Austin and Another v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis: QBD 23 Mar 2005

The claimants had variously been attending a demonstration in London, or passing through. The police detained them in a cordon for several hours. They sought damages. No unlawful acts were alleged against them.
Held: There was no deprivation of liberty during the initial period when the cordon was not absolute and people were free to leave by the pavements if they wished to do so. But during the subsequent period no one was free to leave without permission. Once the full cordon was in place there was a deprivation of liberty within the meaning of article 5(1), but that the containment was capable of being justified under article 5(1)(c) as the police reasonably believed that all those present within the cordon, including the appellant, were demonstrators and were about to commit a breach of the peace. He rejected the appellant’s claim at common law for false imprisonment.

Judges:

Tugendhat J

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 480 (QB), [2005] HRLR 647, [2005] HRLR 20, [2005] UKHRR 1039, [2005] Po LR 68, [2005] UKHRR 1039

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 5(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Austin and Another v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis CA 15-Oct-2007
The claimants appealed dismissal of their claims for false imprisonment and unlawful detention by the respondent in his policing of a demonstration. They had been held within a police cordon in the streets for several hours to prevent the spread of . .
At First Instance – Austin and Another v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis HL 28-Jan-2009
Movement retsriction was not Liberty Deprivation
The claimants had been present during a demonstration policed by the respondent. They appealed against dismissal of their claims for false imprisonment having been prevented from leaving Oxford Circus for over seven hours. The claimants appealed . .
Cited – Jones and Others v The Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis Admn 6-Nov-2019
Distributed Demonstration not within 1986 Act
The claimants, seeking to demonstrate support for the extinction rebellion movement by demonstrating in London, now challenged an order made under the 1986 Act restricting their right to demonstrate.
Held: The XRAU was not a public assembly at . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Torts – Other, Human Rights

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.263171

FN (Article 8, Removal, Viable Options) Eritrea: IAT 18 Apr 2006

IAT The assessment of an in-country Article 8 claim will normally first require consideration of (i) whether there are insurmountable obstacles to the appellant’s family accompanying him or her abroad and then second, (ii) whether even if there exist such obstacles, there is a viable option of an entry clearance application.
The fact that before being able to apply for entry clearance a person may have to perform military service in his country of origin will not normally be a factor of any significance in assessing the proportionality of a return in the context of Article 8.

Citations:

[2006] UKAIT 00044

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8

Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.241834

Desnousse v London Borough of Newham and others: CA 17 May 2006

The occupier had been granted a temporary licence by the authority under the homelessness provisions whilst it made its assessment. The assessment concluded that she had become homeless intentionally, and therefore terminated the licence and set out to evict her. She claimed that the authority had to get a court authority before so evicting her.
Held: A court order was not required. If there was an interference with the licensee’s article 8 rights, that interference was proportionate and justified. The decision in Hamad was not decided per incuriam. As to the appliacnt’s human rights ‘even though her rights in respect of the Flat were arranged by PCHA on behalf of Newham, the owner, Veni, is not a public authority and any steps taken by it to retake possession could not constitute action taken by a public authority in breach of her Convention rights.’
Lloyd LJ (dissenting) ‘a reading of section 3 of the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 which does not allow it to extend to the recovery of possession from someone in the position of the Appellant is not compatible with her Convention rights under article 8. I would therefore hold that, although Mohamed v. Manek is otherwise a binding authority on the point, the effect of section 3 of the Human Rights Act 1998 is that, in order to ensure compatibility with an occupier’s right to respect for his or her home under article 8, from 2 October 2000, where a person is in residential occupation of self-contained accommodation under a licence, the application of section 3 of the Protection from Eviction Act 1977 is not excluded by the fact of the accommodation having been made available in pursuance of a local housing authority’s duties under section 188(1) or section 190(2)(a) of the Housing Act 1996. ‘

Judges:

Lord Justice Tuckey Lord Justice Lloyd Lord Justice Pill

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 547, Times 28-Jun-2006, [2006] QB 831

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996 188, Protection from Eviction Act 1977, Housing (Homeless Persons) Act 1977, Homelessness (Suitability of Accommodation) (England) Order 2003 (SI 2003/3326), European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Not per incuriam – Mohamed v Manek and Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea CA 28-Apr-1995
The claimant applied to the Council for accommodation, claiming to be homeless and in priority need. The council housed him in a hotel owned by Mr Manek in Tooting Bec . He had a room, a separate bathroom and lavatory, and shared use of a kitchen. . .
Cited – Regina v Newham Borough Council ex parte Ojuri (No 5) Admn 11-Sep-1998
. .
Cited – Regina v Hillingdon London Borough Council Ex parte Puhlhofer HL 2-Jan-1986
Not Homeless Even if Accomodation Inadequate
The applicants, a married couple, lived with a young child and later also a baby in one room of a guest house. They were given breakfast but had no cooking or washing facilities. They succeeded on a judicial review of the housing authority’s . .
Cited – Mohram Ali v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council CA 27-May-1992
A challenge to the exercise of homelessness duties by a local authority must be by way of Judicial Review. Nolan LJ: ‘It follows that in my judgment the public law duties of the council were not discharged until they had completed the process of . .
Cited – O’Rourke v Mayor etc of the London Borough of Camden HL 12-Jun-1997
The claimant had been released from prison and sought to be housed as a homeless person. He said that his imprisonment brought him within the category of having special need. He also claimed damages for the breach.
Held: The Act was intended . .
Cited – Miliangos v George Frank (Textiles) Ltd CA 1975
The court looked at what makes a case decided per incuriam: ‘a case is not decided per incuriam because counsel have not cited all the relevant authorities or referred to this or that rule of court or statutory provision.’ (Lord Denning MR) . .
Cited – Mohamed v Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council HL 1-Nov-2001
Mrs M came to England in 1994 living first in Ealing and then Hammersmith. Mr M came later and lived elsewhere in Hammersmith. Hammersmith gave them jointly temporary accommodation, first in a hotel and then in a flat. They then applied under . .
Cited – Young v The Bristol Aeroplane Co Ltd CA 28-Jul-1944
Court of Appeal must follow Own Decisions
The claimant was injured and received compensation. He then sought to recover again, alleging breach of statutory duty by his employers.
Held: The Court of Appeal was in general bound to follow its own previous decisions. The court considered . .
Cited – Poplar Housing and Regeneration Community Association Ltd v Donoghue CA 27-Apr-2001
The defendant resisted accelerated possession proceedings brought for rent arrears under his assured shorthold tenancy, by a private housing association who was a successor to a public authority.
Held: Once the human rights issue was raised, . .
Cited – Morelle Ltd v Wakeling CA 1955
The plaintiff asserted ownership of leasehold land. A similar situation had arisen in an earlier case befoe the Court of appeal, and the court was asked to decide that that case had been decided per incuriam.
Held: The per incuriam principle . .
Cited – Pittalis v Grant CA 1989
A point was raised for the first time on appeal.
Held: Though an appellate court could exclude a pure question of law which had not been raised at first instance from being raised on appeal, the usual practice was to allow it to be taken where . .
Cited – Regina (W) v Lambeth London Borough Council CA 3-May-2002
A family had been found to be voluntarily homeless. The family asked the authority to provide housing to the family under the 1989 Act from its duty to care for the children.
Held: The 1989 Act did not change the law in the 1980 Act. The . .
Cited – Maunsell v Olins HL 1975
The House considered whether a sub-tenant could claim protection under the 1968 Act. This depended on the interpretation of the word ‘premises’ in the context of a sub-tenancy of a cottage on a farm let under an agricultural tenancy.
Held: . .
Cited – Miliangos v George Frank (Textiles) Ltd HL 1975
The issue was whether an English court was able to award damages in Sterling only.
Held: The House distinguished clearly between the substance of the debtor’s obligations and the effect of English procedural law when a debt in a foreign . .
Cited – Starmark Enterprises Ltd v CPL Distribution Ltd CA 31-Jul-2001
The parties were landlord and tenant. The landlords served a notice to increase the rent, but the tenant failed to serve a counter-notice within the relevant period. The landlord claimed the tenant was bound, and appealed a decision against them. . .
Cited – Wellcome Trust Ltd v Hamad; Ebied and Another v Hopkins and Another; Church Commissioners for England v Baines CA 30-Jul-1997
There was a tenancy for mixed residential and business purposes and, with the landlord’s permission, the tenant sublet one of the residential flats within the premises to the defendant, who enjoyed protection under the Act of 1977.
Held: . .
Cited – Eastleigh Borough Council v Walsh 1985
The court considered the nature of a tenancy created by the local authority when satisfying its duty to provide temporary accomodation pending a homelessness assessment. The agreement was described as a tenancy, and held to be one. . .
Cited – Duke v GEC Reliance Systems Limited CA 16-Feb-1987
The court was said to have failed to have proper regard to a European Directive.
The court discussed the meaning of the phrase ‘per incuriam’: ‘I have always understood that the doctrine of per incuriam only applies where another division of . .
Cited – Esselte Ab and British Sugar Plc v Pearl Assurance Plc CA 8-Nov-1996
The tenant was no longer in occupation of the demised premises when he served a s27 notice.
Held: A business tenancy ceases at end of the lease, if the premises are not actually occupied by the tenant despite any notices given. The occupation . .
Cited – London Borough of Hackney v Lambourne 1992
Ralph Gibson LJ said: ‘The defendants . . have no private law right to remain in occupation of the temporary premises let to them. Their private law right is to the accommodation which the council has, in the exercise of its discretion, judged to be . .
Cited – Family Housing Association v Jones CA 1990
The association as licensee of a local authority granted what was described as a licence to the defendant to occupy premises on a temporary basis.
Held: The court found that a licence granted to satisfy a housing duty was a tenancy.
Slade . .
Cited – Rakhit v Carty 1990
A previous decision of the court was found to be within the normal categories of per incuriam, because the earlier decision was made in ignorance of a vitally relevant statutory provision, which showed it to be wrong. The earlier decision was . .
Cited – Williams v Glasbrook Brothers Ltd CA 1947
It was not open to the Court of Appeal to review a previous decision of the same Court for conformity with an earlier decision of the House of Lords (Lord Greene MR). It was for the House of Lords to correct the previous Court of Appeal’s error, and . .
Cited – Williams v Fawcett CA 1985
The court was asked as to the requirement of a notice to show cause why a person should not be committed to prison for contempt of court.
Held: The court refused to follow its earlier decisions as to committal procedures where they were the . .
Cited – Rickards v Rickards CA 1990
The Court of Appeal considered the circumstances in which it could depart from its own earlier decisions under the residual principle. The court refused to follow a previous decision of the same court because, although the relevant House of Lords . .
Cited – Kay and Another v London Borough of Lambeth and others; Leeds City Council v Price and others and others HL 8-Mar-2006
In each case the local authority sought to recover possession of its own land. In the Lambeth case, they asserted this right as against an overstaying former tenant, and in the Leeds case as against gypsies. In each case the occupiers said that the . .
Cited – Rogerson v Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council 2005
The court considered both whether Mohamed v. Manek was still binding and whether the facts of the case were covered by the prior decision, having regard in particular to the emphasis on transience which emerges from the judgment of Nourse LJ. Heled: . .
Cited – London Borough of Harrow v Qazi HL 31-Jul-2003
The applicant had held a joint tenancy of the respondent. His partner gave notice and left, and the property was taken into possession. The claimant claimed restoration of his tenancy saying the order did not respect his right to a private life and . .
Cited – Uratemp Ventures Limited v Collins HL 11-Oct-2001
Can a single room within a hotel comprise a separate dwelling within the 1988 Act and be subject to an assured tenancy?
Held: A single room can be a dwelling. Each case must be interpreted in its own light as a question of fact, but respecting . .
Cited – Runa Begum v London Borough of Tower Hamlets (First Secretary of State intervening) HL 13-Feb-2003
The appellant challenged the procedure for reviewing a decision made as to the suitability of accomodation offered to her after the respondent had accepted her as being homeless. The procedure involved a review by an officer of the council, with an . .
Cited – Warder v Cooper 1970
The locks were changed during the absence of the former licensee, but while his possessions were still in the property. The former tenant had no continuing right to occupy the property.
Held: The former licensee had not been wrongfully . .
Cited – Billson and Others v Residential Tenancies Ltd CA 11-Feb-1991
As to the exercise of relief in equity outside the limitation period: ‘This is not to say that courts of equity should now grant relief without any regard to the statutory provisions. Equity follows the law, but not slavishly nor always: see Cardozo . .
Cited – McPhail v Persons, Names Unknown CA 1973
The court was asked to make an order against persons unknown in order to recover land. Although an owner of land which was being occupied by squatters was entitled to take the remedy into his own hand, he was encouraged to go to a common law court . .

Cited by:

Cited – RJM, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions HL 22-Oct-2008
The 1987 Regulations provided additional benefits for disabled persons, but excluded from benefit those who had nowhere to sleep. The claimant said this was irrational. He had been receiving the disability premium to his benefits, but this was . .
Cited – Yorkshire Bank Finance Ltd v Mulhall and Another CA 24-Oct-2008
The bank had obtained a judgement against the defendant, and took a charging order. Nothing happened for more than twelve years, and the defendant now argued that the order and debt was discharged.
Held: The enforcement of the charging order . .
Cited – ZH and CN, Regina (on The Applications of) v London Boroughs of Newham and Lewisham SC 12-Nov-2014
The court was asked whether the 1977 Act required a local authorty to obtain a court order before taking possession of interim accommodation it provided to an apparently homeless person while it investigated whether it owed him or her a duty under . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Human Rights

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.241721

Regina v Davis (Iain); Regina v Ellis, Regina v Gregory, Regina v Simms, Regina v Martin: CACD 19 May 2006

The several defendants complained at the use at their trials of evidence given anonymously. The perceived need for anonymity arose because, from intimidation, the witnesses would not be willing to give their evidence without it.
Held: The anonymity ruling did not prevent proper investigation with the witnesses in open court of the essential elements of the defence. The court possesses an inherent jurisdiction at common law to control its own proceedings, if necessary by adapting and developing its existing processes ‘to defeat any attempted thwarting of its process’. Arrangements had been made for their anonymisation, but the court had to find a balance with the defendants’ rights to a fair trial. The admission of the evidence had not produced trials which were unfair. The significant test, as established in ECHR jurisprudence, was the opportunity to test the evidence by examination: ‘we can detect no conflict between the decisions of the European Court and the observations of the House of Lords on the issue of witness anonymity. In our judgment the discretion to permit evidence to be given by witnesses whose identity may not be known to the defendant is now beyond question. The potential disadvantages to the defendant require the court to examine the application for witness anonymity with scrupulous care, to ensure that it is necessary and that the witness is indeed in genuine and justified fear of serious consequences if his true identity became known to the defendant or the defendant’s associates. It is in any event elementary that the court should be alert to potential or actual disadvantages faced by the defendant in consequence of any anonymity ruling, and ensure that necessary and appropriate precautions are taken to ensure that the trial itself will be fair. Provided that appropriate safeguards are applied, and the judge is satisfied that a fair trial can take place, it may proceed. If not, he should not permit anonymity. If he does so, and there is a conviction, it is not to be regarded as unsafe simply because the evidence of anonymous witnesses may have been decisive. ‘

Judges:

Sir Igor Judge President, Mitting J, Fulford J

Citations:

Times 01-Jun-2006, [2006] EWCA Crim 1155, [2006] 1 WLR 3130, [2007] Crim LR 70, [2006] 4 All ER 648, [2006] 2 Cr App R 32

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999, European Convention on Human Rights 6(30(d)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v X, Y and Z; Regina v DJX, SCY and GCZ CACD 1989
The court upheld the decision of the Common Sergeant, sitting at the Central Criminal Court, that screens should be erected to enable children who had been treated indecently to give evidence screened from the defendant. The judge was required to . .
Cited – Connelly v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 1964
Plea of Autrefois Acquit is Narrow in Scope
The defendant had been tried for and acquitted of murder. The prosecution then sought to have him tried for robbery out of the same alleged facts. The House considered his plea of autrefois convict.
Held: The majority identified a narrow . .
Cited – D v National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children HL 2-Feb-1977
Immunity from disclosure of their identity should be given to those who gave information about neglect or ill treatment of children to a local authority or the NSPCC similar to that which the law allowed to police informers.
Lord Simon of . .
Cited – Scott and another v Regina, Barnes and others v Regina PC 1989
(Jamaica) The defendants appealed the dismissal of their appeals against convictions for capital murder. In Scott, a special constable was shot with his own revolver in a bar, and subsequently died of his wounds. The only evidence identifying Scott . .
Cited – Regina v Dragic CACD 7-Mar-1996
Written evidence of a severely and chronically ill witness who was unable to attend and give oral evidence was rightly admitted. Lord Taylor CJ said: ‘The fact that there is no ability to cross-examine, that the witness who is absent is the only . .
Cited – Sellick and Sellick, Regina v CACD 14-Mar-2005
The defendants appealed convictions for murder saying that the court had had read to it the statements of four witnesses who refused to attend for fear, having been intimidated. Other witnesses had been unco-operative and had been treated by the . .
Cited – Al-Khawaja v Regina CACD 3-Nov-2005
The defendant had been tried for indecent assaults. The complainant having died before the trial, the judge had ruled that her written statements were admissible. The defendant said he had not had a fair trial.
Held: The appeal failed. The . .
Cited – Kostovski v The Netherlands ECHR 20-Nov-1989
No Anonymity for Witnessses in Criminal Trial
K was convicted of armed robbery on the basis of statements of anonymous witnesses. He was unable to question those witnesses at any stage. Being unaware of the identity of the witnesses deprived K of the very particulars which would have enabled . .
Cited – Windisch v Austria ECHR 27-Sep-1990
cs W was convicted of burglary on the evidence of a mother and daughter, who gave statements without their identity being revealed.
Held: The court recited various principles in the following terms:- ‘All . .
Cited – D (A Minor), Regina (on the Application of) v Camberwell Green Youth Court HL 27-Jan-2005
The defendant challenged the obligatory requirement that evidence given by a person under 17 in sex or violent offence cases must normally be given by video link.
Held: The purpose of the section was to improve the quality of the evidence . .
Cited – Luca v Italy ECHR 27-Feb-2001
The accused had been convicted. After exercising his right to silence, there were read to the court accounts of statements made by co-accused but without an opportunity for him to cross examine the witnesses.
Held: Saunders had established the . .
Cited – Jasper v The United Kingdom ECHR 16-Feb-2000
Grand Chamber – The defendants had been convicted after the prosecution had withheld evidence from them and from the judge under public interest immunity certificates. They complained that they had not had fair trials.
Held: The right was . .
Cited – Ludi v Switzerland ECHR 15-Jun-1992
The claimant challenged his conviction of a drug trafficking offence. The evidence against him consisted mainly of a report by an anonymous undercover agent and transcripts of telephone intercepts of calls between the agent and the applicant. . .
Cited – Osman v The United Kingdom ECHR 28-Oct-1998
Police’s Complete Immunity was Too Wide
(Grand Chamber) A male teacher developed an obsession with a male pupil. He changed his name by deed poll to the pupil’s surname. He was required to teach at another school. The pupil’s family’s property was subjected to numerous acts of vandalism, . .
Cited – Doorson v The Netherlands ECHR 26-Mar-1996
Evidence was given in criminal trials by anonymous witnesses and evidence was also read as a result of a witness having appeared at the trial but then absconded. The defendant was convicted of drug trafficking. As regards the anonymous witnesses, . .
Cited – Regina v Watford Magistrates Court ex parte Lenman QBD 1993
Youths were accused of a violent disorder in the cenre of Watford. Witnesses feared for their safety and made statements to the police under pseudonyms, and at the committal hearing application was made that they give evidence under these . .
Cited – Regina v Taylor and Crabb CACD 22-Jul-1994
The defendants had stood trial at the Central Criminal Court for murder. At the trial a witness anonymised as Miss A was allowed to give evidence anonymously, without revealing her address, behind a screen so arranged that she, the judge, jury and . .
Cited – Van Mechelen And Others v The Netherlands ECHR 23-Apr-1997
A Dutch court had convicted the applicants of attempted manslaughter and robbery on the basis of statements made, before their trial, by anonymous police officers, none of whom gave evidence before the Regional Court or the investigating judge. The . .
Cited – Birutis And Others v Lithuania ECHR 28-Mar-2002
The court considered the conviction of the applicant on the basis of anonymous statements which were not tested by examination at trial.
Held: The Court criticised the means adopted by the authorities ‘in handling the anonymous evidence’. . .
Cited – Visser v The Netherlands ECHR 14-Feb-2002
The applicant alleged that in criminal proceedings against him, there was used in evidence a statement from an anonymous witness, and his defence rights had been unacceptably restricted in breach of Article 6. The police said that witnesses were . .
Cited – PS v Germany ECHR 20-Dec-2001
The applicant had been convicted of sexual abuse of a child. The evidence against him consisted of a statement made by the child’s mother about what her daughter had told her, and evidence by a police officer who had questioned the daughter shortly . .
Cited – Regina v Davis; Regina v Rowe; Regina v Johnson CA 10-Mar-1993
Guidance was given on the procedures to be followed for applications for non-disclosure for public interest immunity. The court identified three types of case. In the first, and most frequent case the prosecution must notify the defence of the . .
Cited – Regina v Preston, Preston, Clarke Etc HL 5-Nov-1993
Telephone tapping evidence consisting of tapping records are to be destroyed after their use for the purpose obtained, but a prosecution was not within that purpose. The underlying purpose of the 1985 Act is to protect information as to the . .
Cited – Regina v Forbes (Anthony Leroy) (Attorney General’s Reference No 3 of 1999) HL 19-Dec-2000
The provisions of the Code of Practice regarding identification parades are mandatory and additional unwritten conditions are not to be inserted. Where there was an identification and the suspect challenged that identification, and consented to the . .
Cited – Regina v H; Regina v C HL 5-Feb-2004
Use of Special Counsel as Last Resort Only
The accused faced charges of conspiring to supply Class A drugs. The prosecution had sought public interest immunity certificates. Special counsel had been appointed by the court to represent the defendants’ interests at the applications.
Cited – Regina v G and Another (PII: Counsel’s duty) CACD 27-May-2004
During the course of the trial, the prosecutor had inadvertently disclosed to the defence legal team material which had been subject to a public interest immunity certificate. The judge made an order under the 1987 Act that the defence team must not . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina v Davis HL 18-Jun-2008
The defendant had been tried for the murder of two men by shooting them at a party. He was identified as the murderer by three witnesses who had been permitted to give evidence anonymously, from behind screens, because they had refused, out of fear, . .
Cited – Al Rawi and Others v The Security Service and Others SC 13-Jul-2011
The claimant pursued a civil claim for damages, alleging complicity of the respondent in his torture whilst in the custody of foreign powers. The respondent sought that certain materials be available to the court alone and not to the claimant or the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence, Human Rights, Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.241773

Lawrence v Pembrokeshire County Council: QBD 11 May 2006

The defendants sought to have struck out the claim in negligence. The claim complained of breach of the claimant’s human rights by the defendant’s social worker in dealing with the claimant and her children

Judges:

Field J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 1029 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Negligence, Human Rights

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.241661

Hussain v The United Kingdom: ECHR 7 Mar 2006

The claimant had been acquitted in a criminal trial. He applied for a defendant’s costs order. He had faced a charge of interfering with witnesses, and in the case against him, a witness did not appear. The court refused the costs, commenting that ‘There is clear evidence on the court papers. The Crown have taken the view that they are not going to compel this witness although there is compelling evidence in respect of those matters.’
Held: The defendant having been acquitted, the judge’s comments and refusal of costs were incompatible with the presumption of innocence.

Citations:

Times 05-Apr-2006, 8866/04, [2006] ECHR 206

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

See Also – Hussain v The United Kingdom ECHR 3-Jun-2010
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.241286

Regina v Smith (Joe): CACD 20 Dec 2000

The defendant was arrested for burglary and a non-intimate sample taken without his consent. The DNA profile matched blood at the scene of the burglary, and this match was the bedrock of the prosecution case. Before the trial, prosecuting counsel applied ex parte to withhold disclosure of certain material. The defence were notified of the application but not of the category into which the material was said to fall. The judge ruled that the material should not be disclosed and the defence were so informed. The defence then submitted to the judge that the DNA evidence derived from the non-intimate sample should be excluded under section 78 on the ground that the police had had no reasonable grounds for suspecting the defendant of committing the burglary, and had not therefore been entitled to arrest him or take the sample. There was no evidence before the jury to show that the police had had reasonable cause to suspect the defendant of the burglary but the judge relied on the PII information to rule that the police had had reasonable grounds for suspicion and declined to exclude the DNA evidence.
Held: There is nothing in human rights law, or in common law jurisdiction to say that the use of material not disclosed to the defence in an ex parte application for a public interest immunity certificate, was a breach of the defendant’s article 6 right which guaranteed a fair trial. Here, the defendant’s arrest was challenged as unlawful. The police sought to justify the arrest on the basis that they had reasonable suspicion of his involvement in the offence, but they sought permission not disclose the basis of that reasonable suspicion, and there is no provision to allow a hearing with special counsel appointed to represent the defendant’s interest in such a situation, although this might be considered in future.

Citations:

Times 20-Dec-2000, [2001] 2 Cr App R 1, [2001] 1 WLR 1031

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 78

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Dearman, Southgate CACD 8-Oct-2001
The appellants had been convicted of conspiracy to supply class A drugs. They appealed against conviction on the basis that the police and subsequently the prosecution involved lies or deceit intended to protect the identity of undercover detectives . .
Cited – Regina (Director of Public Prosecutions) v Acton Youth Court QBD 21-Jun-2001
It was not normally necessary for magistrates to excuse themselves from further involvement in a case after making preliminary rulings on a request for public immunity certificates. The purpose of that ex parte hearing was to ensure the protection . .
Cited – Regina v H; Regina v C CACD 16-Oct-2003
The defendants were charged with serious drugs offences. The prosecutor had applied for public interest immunity certificates. The judge had required the appointment of independent counsel. The prosecutor appealed.
Held: The same district . .
Not good law – Regina v H; Regina v C HL 5-Feb-2004
Use of Special Counsel as Last Resort Only
The accused faced charges of conspiring to supply Class A drugs. The prosecution had sought public interest immunity certificates. Special counsel had been appointed by the court to represent the defendants’ interests at the applications.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.88670