Category: Human Rights

Williams and Another v Hinton and Another: CA 14 Oct 2011

The appellant landlords appealed against the award of damages to their former tenants under the 1985 and 1972 Acts. The judge had proceeded to hear the case in their absence.
Held: The court considered whether the appellants should instead have applied to have the judgments set aside.

Judges:

Moore-Bick, Gross LJJ

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 1123

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Landlord and Tenant Act 1985 11, Defective Premises Act 1972 4, Civil Procedure Rules 39.37

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Van De Hurk v The Netherlands ECHR 19-Apr-1994
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1 (independent tribunal); No violation of Art. 6-1 (fair trial); Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Personal Injury, Human Rights, Civil Procedure Rules

Updated: 20 September 2022; Ref: scu.445636

Sharkunov and Mezentsev v Russia: ECHR 10 Jun 2010

The court was asked as to the lack of legal assistance while in police custody and the use at the trial of incriminating statements that had been made at that stage.
Held: The court repeated the proposition that was first stated in Salduz, that the rights of the defence will in principle be irretrievably prejudiced when incriminating statements made during police interrogation without access to a lawyer are used for a conviction. However, there had been no violation of the right to legal assistance. Neither the letter nor the spirit of article 6 prevents a person from waiving of his own free will, either expressly or tacitly, the entitlement to the guarantees of a fair trial but that, to be effective for Convention purposes, the waiver must be established in an unequivocal manner and be attended by minimum safeguards commensurate to its importance.

Judges:

Christos Rozakis, President

Citations:

[2010] ECHR 892, 75330/01

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Citing:

See Also – Sharkunov And Mezentsev v Russia ECHR 2-Jul-2009
. .
Cited – Salduz v Turkey ECHR 27-Nov-2008
(Grand Chamber) The applicant had been taken into custody before he was interrogated during his detention by police officers of the anti-terrorism branch of the Izmir Security Directorate.
Held: There had been a violation of art 6(3)(c) of the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Ambrose v Harris, Procurator Fiscal, Oban, etc SC 6-Oct-2011
(Scotland) The appellant had variously been convicted in reliance on evidence gathered at different stages before arrest, but in each case without being informed of any right to see a solicitor. The court was asked, as a devolution issue, at what . .
Cited – McGowan (Procurator Fiscal) v B SC 23-Nov-2011
The appellant complained that after arrest, though he had been advised of his right to legal advice, and had declined the offer, it was still wrong to have his subsequent interview relied upon at his trial.
Held: It was not incompatible with . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Criminal Practice

Updated: 20 September 2022; Ref: scu.445388

Murray v The United Kingdom: ECHR 15 Sep 2010

(Final Execution) The Court having found the respondent to have been in breach of the claimants’ human rights in having denied them access to legal advice on arrest for a period of up to 48 hours, now concluded that necessary measures had been taken and the case was closed.

Citations:

[2010] ECHR 1890, 18731/91

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Citing:

See Also – Murray v The United Kingdom ECHR 8-Feb-1996
The applicant had been denied legal advice for 48 hours after he had been taken into custody.
Held: There had been a violation of article 6(1) read with article 6(3)(c). However, it was not a breach of human rights to draw inferences from the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 20 September 2022; Ref: scu.445280

Pun and Others (Gurkhas – Policy- Article 8) Nepal: UTIAC 27 Sep 2011

UTIAC (i) The policy in Chapter 29(4) of the DSP (subsequently replaced by the provisions of SET 12) relating to applications for settlement by adult dependants of former members of HM Forces sets out a true discretion to be exercised outside the Rules by the respondent and cannot reasonably be interpreted as setting out a number of different requirements where the fulfilment of one or more leads to an entitlement to a grant of entry clearance.
(ii) The policy creates a broad discretion to be exercised by the decision taker in the light of the individual facts and circumstances of each case taking into account but not limited to the identified bullet points. These serve to identify some factors which may be relevant whilst not excluding other factors which may depending on the facts of the case be equally relevant.
(iii) As a matter of principle an appellant is entitled to a decision on any appeal before the Tribunal and an article 8 appeal should not be adjourned or sent back to be re-made by the respondent where this course is resisted by the appellant unless there is a compelling reason for doing so. Where as in the present cases a human rights appeal is set in the context of the amendments to the Rules to deal with a particular historical issue and with specific published policies dealing with the approach to be taken in the case of adult dependants not falling within the Rules, a decision under article 8 will inevitably be informed by the provisions of the Rules and the policy.
(iv) If the Tribunal does determine an article 8 appeal when a decision under the policy is or would otherwise be sent back to the respondent, that appeal cannot be treated as a way for the Tribunal to exercise a discretion which under the policy is a matter for the respondent but must be determined in accordance with the guidelines set out by the House of Lords and the Supreme Court.

Judges:

Latter, Jarvis SIJJ, Digney J

Citations:

[2011] UKUT 377 (IAC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 20 September 2022; Ref: scu.445178

Abdulaziz, Cabales And Balkandali v United Kingdom: ECHR 28 May 1985

The claimants had each settled within the UK in accordance with Immigration rules, but now challenged refusal of leave to remain to their husbands who sought to join them.
Held: Article 8 did not impose a ‘general obligation on the part of a Contracting State to respect the choice by married couples of the country of their matrimonial residence and to accept the non-national spouses for settlement in that country’.
‘Whatever else the word ‘family’ may mean, it must at any rate include the relationship that arises from a lawful and genuine marriage . . even if a family life . . has not yet been fully established’.

Citations:

9473/81, [1985] ECHR 7, 9214/80, 9474/81, (1985) 7 EHRR 471

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 3 8

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Ali and Bibi, Regina (on The Applications of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 18-Nov-2015
At the claimants alleged that the rules requiring a foreign spouse or partner of a British citizen or a person settled in this country to pass a test of competence in the English language before coming to live here were an unjustifiable interference . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Immigration, Family

Updated: 20 September 2022; Ref: scu.445027

Equality and Human Rights Commission v Prime Minister and Others: Admn 3 Oct 2011

The defendant had published a set of guidelines for intelligence officers called upon to detain and interrogate suspects. The defendant said that the guidelines could only be tested against individual real life cases, and that the court should not answer hypothetical questions. The objection lay to reactions to anticipated torture and mistreatment by third party countries.
Held: Permission to apply for review was granted, but the review itself was refused. Standing was provided by section 30 of the 2006 Act.
The guidance was addressed to the officers and required them to report matters to Ministers, who, it must be presumed, would respond lawfully. It set out difference reactions where mistreatment was known of, and where there was a low risk of mistreatment. Reactions included withdrawing and reporting requirements.
The Commission’s substantial challenge was that the the guidance used a ‘serious risk’ test for secondary liability, but said that that was not the standard applicable at law. ‘In the context of the Guidance and taking it for what it is, there is no material difference between a ‘real risk’ and a ‘serious risk’ of torture or CIDT taking place.’

Judges:

Sir Anthony May P, Keith J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 2401 (Admin), [2012] 1 WLR 1389, [2011] UKHRR 1287

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Equality Act 2006 1 30, United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel or Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (1984), Criminal Justice Act 1988 134(1)

Citing:

Cited – Johnson v Youden KBD 1950
For a charge of aiding and abetting, the defendant must be shown to have been aware of the essential elements of his acts which constituted the complete crime. However, that may be inferred if a defendant shuts his eyes to the obvious.
Lord . .
Cited – Iskandarov v Russia ECHR 23-Sep-2010
. .
Cited – Abdulazhon Isakov v Russia ECHR 8-Jul-2010
. .
Cited – Al-Haq, Regina (On the Application of) v Secretary Of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs Admn 27-Jul-2009
The claimant sought a declaration that the UK was in breach of its international obligations. The claimant was a non-governmental human rights organisation based in Palestine. The respondent argued that the issue was beyond the court’s jurisdiction, . .
Cited – Ismoilov And Others v Russia ECHR 24-Apr-2008
The court criticised the Russian system in prisons: ‘in the absence of clear legal provisions establishing the procedure for ordering and extending detention with a view to extradition and setting up time-limits for such detention, the deprivation . .
Cited – Royal College of Nursing of the United Kingdom v Department of Health and Social Security HL 2-Jan-1981
The court was asked whether nurses could properly involve themselves in a pregnancy termination procedure not known when the Act was passed, and in particular, whether a pregnancy was ‘terminated by a medical practitioner’, when it was carried out . .
Cited – Saadi v Italy (United Kingdom intervening) ECHR 28-Feb-2008
(Grand Chamber) When considering the appropriateness of a deportation order to a country with which the deporting country had a memorandum of understanding that the destination country would not torture the deportee, a court must look beyond the . .
Cited – Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority and Department of Health and Social Security HL 17-Oct-1985
Lawfulness of Contraceptive advice for Girls
The claimant had young daughters. She challenged advice given to doctors by the second respondent allowing them to give contraceptive advice to girls under 16, and the right of the first defendant to act upon that advice. She objected that the . .
Cited – In re Officer L HL 31-Jul-2007
Police officers appealed against refusal of orders protecting their anonymity when called to appear before the Robert Hamill Inquiry.
Held: ‘The tribunal accordingly approached the matter properly under article 2 in seeking to ascertain . .
Cited – Mamatkulov and Askarov v Turkey ECHR 4-Feb-2005
(Grand Chamber) The applicants had resisted extradition to Uzbekistan from Turkey to stand trial on very serious charges, saying that if returned they would be tortured. There was material to show that that was not a fanciful fear. On application . .
Cited – Regina v Bryce CACD 18-May-2004
The defendant said that his involvement in the murder of which he had been convicted had been secondary only. He was alleged to have transported the killer and the gun which he used to commit the murder to a caravan near the victim’s home so that . .
Cited – Regina v Woollin HL 2-Apr-1998
The defendant appealed against his conviction for the murder of his child. He had thrown the child to the floor, hitting the head. He said that he had not intended to kill the child.
Held: On a murder charge, where the short direction on . .
Cited – Regina v Powell (Anthony) and Another; Regina v English HL 30-Oct-1997
When the court looked at the issue of foreseeability of murder in an allegation of joint enterprise, there was no requirement to show intent by the secondary party. The forseeability of the risk of the principal committing the offence from the point . .
Cited – Soering v The United Kingdom ECHR 7-Jul-1989
(Plenary Court) The applicant was held in prison in the UK, pending extradition to the US to face allegations of murder, for which he faced the risk of the death sentence, which would be unlawful in the UK. If extradited, a representation would be . .
Cited – Hertfordshire Police v Van Colle; Smith v Chief Constable of Sussex Police HL 30-Jul-2008
Police Obligations to Witnesses is Limited
A prosecution witness was murdered by the accused shortly before his trial. The parents of the deceased alleged that the failure of the police to protect their son was a breach of article 2.
Held: The House was asked ‘If the police are alerted . .
Cited – Regina v Benjafield, Regina v Leal, Regina v Rezvi, Regina v Milford HL 24-Jan-2002
Statutory provisions which reversed the burden of proof in cases involving drug smuggling and other repeat offenders, allowing confiscation orders to be made were not necessarily in contravention of the article 6 right. However the question of . .
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 – 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 . .
Cited – Jones v Ministry of Interior for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and others HL 14-Jun-2006
The claimants said that they had been tortured by Saudi police when arrested on false charges. They sought damages, and appealed against an order denying jurisdiction over the defendants. They said that the allegation of torture allowed an exception . .

Cited by:

Cited – Ali Hussein v Secretary of State for Defence Admn 1-Feb-2013
The claimant sought to challenge the legality of techniques of interrogation intended to be used by forces members detaining person captured in Afghanistan. He had himself been mistreated by such officers in Iraq. The defendant denied he had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative, Human Rights, Crime, Armed Forces

Updated: 20 September 2022; Ref: scu.444868

BH and Another v HM Advocate: HCJ 29 Jul 2011

Judges:

Lord Osborne, Lord Reed, Lord Mackay of Drumadoon

Citations:

[2011] ScotHC HCJAC – 77

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Extradition Act 2003

Cited by:

Appeal from – BH and Another v The Lord Advocate and Another SC 20-Jun-2012
The appellants wished to resist their extradition to the US to face criminal charges for drugs. As a married couple that said that the extraditions would interfere with their children’s rights to family life.
Held: The appeals against . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Human Rights, Extradition

Updated: 20 September 2022; Ref: scu.444893

NS v Secretary of State For The Home Department: ECJ 22 Sep 2011

ECJ Opinion – (Principles Of Community Law) Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 – Transfer of asylum seekers to the Member State responsible for examining the asylum application – Obligation on the transferring Member State to exercise the right to assume responsibility for the examination itself under Article 3(2) of Regulation No 343/2003 – Compatibility of the transfer of an asylum seeker with the Charter of Fundamental Rights, the ECHR and the Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees – Field of application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights – Relationship between the Charter of Fundamental Rights, the Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and the ECHR – Right to an effective remedy – Protocol (No 30) on the application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union to Poland and to the United Kingdom

Judges:

Trstenjak AG

Citations:

C-493/10, [2011] EUECJ C-493/10

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation (EC) No 343/2003

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Opinion – NS v Secretary of State for the Home Department etc ECJ 21-Dec-2011
Prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment
ECJ (Grand Chamber) European Union law – Principles – Fundamental rights – Implementation of European Union law – Prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment – Common European Asylum System – Regulation (EC) No . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration

Updated: 20 September 2022; Ref: scu.444669

AJ v Secretary of State for The Home Department: CA 21 Sep 2011

The claimant appealed against a refusal of his challenge to the respondent’s decision to refuse him leave to remain in the UK. His claim was on article 8 grounds.

Judges:

Pill, Etherton LJJ, Sir Mark Potter

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 1081

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 20 September 2022; Ref: scu.444600

Shapovalova v Ukraine: ECHR 22 Sep 2011

Citations:

18508/07, [2011] ECHR 1394

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Cited by:

See Also – Shapovalov v Ukraine ECHR 31-Jul-2012
The claimant, a Ukrainian journalist said that he had (contrary to the Ukranian Information Act 1992) been refused access by administrative authorities during the 2004 elections to certain information and meetings. He relied on article 6 because the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 20 September 2022; Ref: scu.444653

Palomo Sanchez And Others v Spain: ECHR 12 Sep 2011

Citations:

28955/06, [2011] ECHR 1319

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Eweida And Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 15-Jan-2013
Eweida_ukECHR2013
The named claimant had been employed by British Airways. She was a committed Christian and wished to wear a small crucifix on a chain around her neck. This breached the then dress code and she was dismissed. Her appeals had failed. Other claimants . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 20 September 2022; Ref: scu.444546

Regina on the Application of Szuluk v The Governor of HMP Full Sutton and the Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 29 Oct 2004

Right of prison to read correspondence with doctor

Judges:

The Master Of The Rolls Lord Justice Sedley Lord Justice Neuberger

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 1426, [2004] EWHC 2652 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Szuluk, Regina (on the Application of) v HM Prison Full Sutton Admn 20-Feb-2004
The prisoner was receiving long term health treatment, and objected that his correspondence with the doctor was being read. He was held as a category B prisoner but in a prison also holding category A prisoners, whose mail would be read. The prison . .

Cited by:

At Court of Appeal – Edward Szuluk v United Kingdom ECHR 3-Jun-2009
The prisoner complained that the prison had monitored his conversations and communications with his doctor.
Held: The actions were a violation of the prisoner’s article 8 rights. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Prisons, Human Rights

Updated: 19 September 2022; Ref: scu.219123

Dougoz v Greece: ECHR 6 Mar 2001

Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 3; Violation of Art. 5-1; Violation of Art. 5-4; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award.
When assessing conditions of detention, account has to be taken of the cumulative effects of those conditions, as well as the specific allegations made by the applicant.
Article 5(1) of the ECHR requires any deprivation of liberty to have a legal basis in domestic law, and that law must be sufficiently precise and accessible in order to avoid all risk of arbitrariness

Citations:

40907/98, ECHR 2001-II, [2001] ECHR 210, [2001] ECHR 213, [2009] ECHR 2248

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 3

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Lorse and Others v The Netherlands ECHR 4-Feb-2003
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 3 with regard to the first applicant ; No violation of Art. 3 with regard to the other applicants ; No violation of Art. 8 ; No violation of Art. 13 . .
Cited – Hemmati and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 27-Nov-2019
The Home Secretary appealed from a finding that illegally entered asylum seekers had been unlawfully detained pending removal. The five claimants had travelled through other EU member states before entering the UK. The court considered inter alia . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 19 September 2022; Ref: scu.166059

Tomanovic and Others v Foreign and Commonwealth Office: CA 4 Feb 2021

Claims against the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, that the Head of the Special Prosecutions Office of the Republic of Kosovo failed to investigate offences committed against the claimants’ loved ones; this was a breach of the obligation to investigate unlawful killings and abductions under s.6 Human Rights Act 1998 read with articles 2 and 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and that a claim lies against the FCO as his employer responsible for his secondment to work as a prosecutor in Kosovo.

Judges:

Lady Justice Simler

Citations:

[2021] EWCA Civ 117

Links:

Bailii, Judiciary

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Human Rights

Updated: 19 September 2022; Ref: scu.657658

TP AR and SXC, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: Admn 3 May 2019

Challenge to Universal Credit transitional arrangements as discriminatory against severely disabled claimants.
Held: The claim succeeded.

Judges:

Swift J

Citations:

[2019] EWHC 1116 (Admin), [2019] WLR(D) 267, [2019] PTSR 2123

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Welfare Reform Act 2012, Universal Credit Regulations 2013, Universal Credit (Transitional Provisions) Regulations 2014

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Benefits, Human Rights

Updated: 19 September 2022; Ref: scu.643821

SAB and Others (Students-Serious Breach of Conditions – Article 8) Ghana: UTIAC 7 Dec 2010

UTIAC The First Appellant was a research student making proper progress reading for a doctorate. His leave was curtailed before his viva voce examination was arranged. The immigration judge dismissed the appeal under the Immigration Rules and on Article 8 ECHR grounds. There was no challenge to the decision under the Immigration Rules. The immigration judge was right to dismiss the immigration appeal, although it was a significant interference with the appellant’s private and family life to prevent him from completing his doctorate whilst in the United Kingdom, but concluded that it was an entirely proportionate response to a person who totally disregarded his obligations under the Immigration Rules by working for hours excessive of those permitted, over a prolonged period.
The restriction on working hours imposed on students are hard to police and other things being equal a person who chooses to ignore the Rules should not expect to find it easy to persuade the Tribunal that he is entitled to remain on human rights grounds until his degree is finished. Any other result would seriously undermine the requirement that students take only limited employment and it would be unfair to those students who might wish to work longer hours than are allowed.
Pankina v SSHD [2010] EWCA Civ 719 and CDS (PBS: ‘available’: Article 8) Brazil [2010] UKUT 00305 (IAC) do not support the argument that a serious breach of the Immigration Rules can be overlooked. They are examples of how a person guilty of a technical or minor breach of the Rules towards the end of his studies, might, dependent upon the particular circumstances of the case, successfully rely on human rights grounds to be allowed to complete them. They are not cases that provide an easy licence for those that choose not to comply with the Immigration Rules.

Judges:

Goldstein SIJ

Citations:

[2010] UKUT 441 (IAC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 19 September 2022; Ref: scu.444074

Roberts And Roberts v The United Kingdom: ECHR 5 Jul 2011

(Admissibility) The claimants, members of the British Nation Party, had complained of defamation by other elements of the BNP as regards te circumstances of the theft of the proceeds of a meeting being stolen from their home. The claim had been dismissed as reportage of a politicalk event with Reynolds privilege: ‘libel litigation is not the conduct of political vendettas by other means.’
Held: The applicants had faied to exhaust the domestic remedies available and the case was declared inadmissible.

Judges:

Lech Garlicki, P

Citations:

38681/08, [2011] ECHR 1220

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6.1

Human Rights, Defamation, Media

Updated: 19 September 2022; Ref: scu.443792

Docherty and Others v The Scottish Ministers: SCS 2 Sep 2011

The pursuers each sought damages, saying that the conditions in which they had been held whilst prisoners in HMP Barlinnie had infringed their human rights.
Held: It would be contrary to public policy and an abuse of process for a person to proceed by way of an ordinary action to establish that a public authority’s decision had infringed rights that were entitled to protection under public law. Where private rights depended on prior public law decisions, they must ordinarily be litigated by judicial review.

Judges:

Lord President, Lady Smith, Lord Wheatley

Citations:

[2011] ScotCS CSIH – 58, 2012 SC 150

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 3 8

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Cited by:

Cited – Ruddy v Chief Constable, Strathclyde Police and Another SC 28-Nov-2012
The pursuer said that he had been assaulted whilst in the custody of the responder’s officers. He began civil actions after his complaint was rejected. He repeated the allegation of the assault, and complained also as to the conduct of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Prisons, Torts – Other, Human Rights

Updated: 19 September 2022; Ref: scu.443605

Bradshaw and Roberts v The Attorney General, Superintendent of Glendairy Prison And, The Chief Marshall: PC 24 May 1995

(Barbados) The maximum of 5 years to be spent awaiting the death penalty is appropriate and is not to be varied, even though it might be calculated broadly. It serves as a good general guideline.
(Barbados)

Citations:

Times 01-Jun-1995, Gazette 21-Jun-1995, [1995] UKPC 21

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Commonwealth

Human Rights, Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442327

Lait v Evening Standard Ltd: CA 28 Jul 2011

The claimant alleged defamation by the defendant in an article regarding her expenses claims as an MP. She appealed against summary judgment in favour of the defence in their pleaded defence of honest comment.
Held: Laws LJ said: ‘The principle identified in Jameel consists in the need to put a stop to defamation proceedings that do not serve the legitimate purpose of protecting the claimant’s reputation. Such proceedings are an abuse of the process. The focus in the cases has been on the value of the claim to the claimant; but the principle is not, in my judgment, to be categorised merely as a variety of the de minimis rule tailored for defamation actions. Its engine is not only the overriding objective of the Civil Procedure Rules but also, in Lord Phillips’ words, the need to keep ‘a proper balance between the Article 10 right of freedom of expression and the protection of individual reputation . . The balance to be struck between public interest and private right is increasingly to be seen as a function of our constitution; and the law of defamation is increasingly to be seen as an aspect of it.’

Judges:

Lord Neuberger MR, Laws, Longmore LJJ

Citations:

[2012] EMLR 4, [2011] 1 WLR 2973, [2011] WLR (D) 262, [2011] EWCA Civ 859

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 10

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Lait MP v Evening Standard Ltd QBD 25-Mar-2010
The claimant MP alleged defamation. The defendant applied to have certain alleged meanings in the article struck out. The article related to the alleged relation to repayment of expenses claims in her capacity as an MP.
Held: Though certain . .
Appeal from – Lait v Evening Standard Ltd QBD 9-Dec-2010
. .
Cited – Khader v Aziz and Others CA 23-Jun-2010
The claimant brought defamation proceedings after she had found and returned a valuable necklace belonging to the first respondent. The claim had been dismissed as an abuse of process.
Held: The claimant’s appeal failed: ‘there is such a . .

Cited by:

Cited – Morrissey v McNicholas and Another QBD 26-Oct-2011
The claimant musician alleged defamation, saying that the defendant had accused him of being a right wing racist. The defendant now applied to strike out the claim as an abuse of process because of the claimant’s delay.
Held: The application . .
Cited – QRS v Beach and Another QBD 26-Sep-2014
The court gave its reasons for granting an interim injunction to prevent the defendants publshing materials on their web-sites which were said to harrass the claimants.
Held: Whilst it was important to protect the identity of the claimants, . .
Cited – Kordowski v Hudson QBD 21-Oct-2011
The claimant alleged that the defendant, the chief executive of the Law Society had slandered him in a conversation with another senior lawyer. The claimant now sought summary judgment against the claimant, saying that the defence had no realistic . .
Cited – Jeeg Global Ltd v Hare QBD 29-Mar-2012
The claimant had obtained an order restricting the defendant from asserting any kind of insolvency in the claimant. The defendant now sought the strike out of the claim as an abuse of process. He said that any such disclosure had been on one . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Defamation, Human Rights

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.442254

Antonenkov and Others v Ukraine: ECHR 22 Nov 2005

ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of Art. 6-1 (length of proceedings); No violation of P4-2; Remainder inadmissible; Pecuniary damage – claim dismissed; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings.

Citations:

14183/02, [2005] ECHR 728

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Human Rights

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.235634

Gita Ram v Baskinder Ram,Solinder Ram, Monder Ram and Maurice William Russell: CA 5 Nov 2004

A bankrupt had, before his bankruptcy disposed of his share in a house at an undervalue. His wife appealed an order that the share disposed of should vest entirely in the trustee in bankruptcy. Matrimonial proceedings had also been commenced.
Held: The wife was seeking effectively not re-instatement, but the creation of a position which would better allow her own matrimonial claim. The rules required the position to be restored. Any automatic proiotity given to the trustee in bankruptcy was not an infringement of the wife’s human rights. Wider interests were in the balance. Nevertheless rule 1293) still required revision.

Judges:

Potter, Lord Justice Potter Lord Justice Buxton Lord Justice Carnwath

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 1452, [2005] 2 FLR 63

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Insolvency Act 1986 305 423

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Woodley v Woodley (2) CA 12-Apr-1993
A stay of execution of an order against matrimonial assets was not defeated by bankruptcy. As to the interplay of the Insolvency Rules and matrimonial proceedings.
Balcombe LJ said: ‘I cannot leave this case without saying something about the . .
Cited – In re Mordant CA 1996
The court discussed the interplay of family and insolvency proceedings: ‘Since the wife is unable to prove in the husband’s bankruptcy, the position . . is that the husband’s trustee must use the andpound;385,000 in paying the trustee’s expenses . .
Cited – Chohan v Saggar and Another CA 27-Dec-1993
The word ‘and’ in sections 423(2)(a) and 423(2)(b) is to be read conjunctively not disjunctively. Section 238(3) is to be interpreted as requiring restoration of the former position ‘as far as possible’ or ‘as far as practicable’, and that . .
Cited – H M Customs and Excise and Another v MCA and Another; A v A; Re MCA CA 22-Jul-2002
The husband and wife divorced and a property adjustment order applied for. The husband had been convicted and a drugs proceeds order made under the 1994 Act. The order had not been satisfied, and the receiver applied for money from the matrimonial . .
Cited – Beyeler v Italy ECHR 5-Jan-2000
The concept of ‘possessions’ in Art. 1 has an autonomous meaning which is not limited to ownership of physical goods and is independent from the formal classification in domestic law, and requires the examination of the question whether the . .
Cited – James and Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 21-Feb-1986
The claimants challenged the 1967 Act, saying that it deprived them of their property rights when lessees were given the power to purchase the freehold reversion.
Held: Article 1 (P1-1) in substance guarantees the right of property. Allowing a . .
Cited – Inze v Austria ECHR 28-Oct-1987
Art 14 was engaged in respect of discrimination over future interests despite Marckx. The case turned on what singular provisions of Austrian inheritance law, whereby the illegitimate claimant had some, but incomplete, rights on his mother’s . .
Cited – Petrovic v Austria ECHR 27-Mar-1998
The applicant was refused a grant of parental leave allowance in 1989. At that time parental leave allowance was available only to mothers. The applicant complained that this violated article 14 taken together with article 8.
Held: The . .
Cited – Ghaidan v Godin-Mendoza HL 21-Jun-2004
Same Sex Partner Entitled to tenancy Succession
The protected tenant had died. His same-sex partner sought a statutory inheritance of the tenancy.
Held: His appeal succeeded. The Fitzpatrick case referred to the position before the 1998 Act: ‘Discriminatory law undermines the rule of law . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency, Trusts, Human Rights

Updated: 17 September 2022; Ref: scu.219208

A B v The Netherlands: ECHR 29 Jan 2002

Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection dismissed (non-exhaustion); Violation of Art. 8 in respect of control of correspondence with the Commission and with lawyer; No violation of Art. 8 in respect of other correspondence; Violation of Art. 13

Citations:

37328/97, [2002] ECHR 9

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Judgment – A B v The Netherlands ECHR 15-Sep-2010
Execution of judgment – The case concerns the control of the applicant’s correspondence with the European Commission of Human Rights by prison authorities of the Netherlands Antilles between 1997 and 1998. The case also concerns interference with . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Prisons

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.167531

Conka v Belgium: ECHR 5 Feb 2002

ECHR Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); Violation of Art. 5-1; No violation of Art. 5-2; Violation of Art. 5-4; Violation of P4-4; No violation of Art. 13+3; Violation of Art. 13 + P4-4; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings
The applicants were arrested so that they could be deported. They challenged their arrest.

Citations:

51564/99, [2002] ECHR 14, [2011] ECHR 2135

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Citing:

Followed – 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 by:

Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex parte Saadi and others HL 31-Oct-2002
The applicants were Kurdish asylum seekers. The Home Secretary introduced powers to detain certain asylum seekers for a short period in order to facilitate the speedy resolution of their applications. Only those who it was suspected might run away . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Immigration

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.167590

Condliff, Regina (on The Application of) v North Staffordshire Primary Care Trust: CA 27 Jul 2011

the claimant, a morbidly obese man, made a funding request to the trust for gastric surgery. This was refused because he did not meet the trust’s policy of offering funding to people who had a body mass index which exceeded a certain level. The claimant sought judicial review of the trust’s decision on the ground, inter alia, that it had breached his right to respect for his private and family life under article 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR). The court was asked whether article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights makes it unlawful for a Primary Care Trust (PCT) to adopt an Individual Funding Request (IFR) policy by which all such requests are to be considered and determined exclusively by reference to clinical factors.
Held: The application was dismissed. Article 8 of ECHR did not give rise to a positive duty on a statutory health care provider to consider non-clinical, social or welfare considerations wider than the comparative medical conditions and medical needs of different patients when deciding on the allocation of funding for medical treatment.
Toulson LJ said of section 3 of the 2006 Act, ‘this is a public law duty and not a direct duty owed to individual patients’.

Judges:

Maurice Kay VP, Hallett, Toulson LJJ

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 910, [2012] PTSR 460, (2011) 121 BMLR 192, [2011] HRLR 38, [2011] Med LR 572, [2011] ACD 113

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

National Health Service Act 2006 3, European Convention on Human Rights8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Condliff, Regina (on The Application of) v North Staffordshire Primary Care Trust Admn 7-Apr-2011
The patient sought judicial review of the decision not to fund laparoscopic gastric by-pass surgery. He said that the policy by which all such requests are to be considered and determined exclusively by reference to clinical factors, infringed his . .

Cited by:

Cited – A and B, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Health SC 14-Jun-2017
The court was asked: ‘Was it unlawful for the Secretary of State for Health, the respondent, who had power to make provisions for the functioning of the National Health Service in England, to have failed to make a provision which would have enabled . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Health Professions

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.442230

Huitson, Regina (on The Application of) v Revenue and Customs: CA 25 Jul 2011

The claimant challenged the lawfulness of HMRC’s enforcement of retrospective amendments to legislation in violation of his human rights. The claimant says that, before the legislation was amended with retrospective effect, he was entitled to relief from UK income tax on income received by him from a trust in the Isle of Man. Now HMRC rely on the amendments to deny him, retrospectively, the tax relief previously available.

Judges:

Mummery, Sullivan, Tomlinson LJJ

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 893, [2012] QB 489

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Recovery of Medical Costs for Asbestos Diseases (Wales) Bill (Reference By The Counsel General for Wales) SC 9-Feb-2015
The court was asked whether the Bill was within the competence of the Welsh Assembly. The Bill purported to impose NHS charges on those from whom asbestos related damages were recovered.
Held: The Bill fell outside the legislative competence . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Taxes Management, Human Rights

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.442161

Slobodan Milosevic v The Netherlands: ECHR 19 Jan 1999

Admissibility – The applicant brought summary civil proceedings (kort geding) against the Netherlands State before the President of the Regional Court (arrondissementsrechtbank) of The Hague. He sought an order directed against the State for his unconditional release; in the alternative, for him to be returned to the FRY; in the further alternative, for the State to make representations to ‘the so-called Tribunal’ (i.e. the ICTY) and other competent international bodies and institutions for his release; in the still further alternative, for the State to make representations to ‘the alleged Tribunal’ (again, i.e. the ICTY) and other competent international bodies and institutions for his return to the FRY. He argued, essentially, that his transfer to the ICTY was illegal as a matter of the domestic law of the FRY; that the ICTY itself lacked a basis in international law, having been set up by a resolution of the Security Council of the United Nations (to wit, resolution no. 827 of 25 May 1993) and not by a multilateral treaty; that the ICTY was the handmaiden of NATO and therefore not an independent and impartial tribunal in the sense of Article 6 of the Convention; that the actions of the Security Council and the ICTY were discriminatory; and that he was entitled to immunity as a former head of state. In view of these considerations the Netherlands State was acting unlawfully by allowing him to be detained and remain in detention on its territory,

Judges:

J-P Costa, P

Citations:

77631/01, [1999] ECHR 194

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6

Human Rights, International

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.441990

The London Borough of X v Y (Deprivation of Liberty In Scotland): FD 23 Feb 2021

Application by the London Borough of X for orders permitting the local authority a) to place a child Y outside of the jurisdiction, in Scotland, pursuant to paragraph 19, Schedule 2, Children Act 1989; b) to deprive Y of his liberty and c) to utilise the services of a secure transport company to transport Y to the proposed placement in Scotland, using reasonable force if necessary.

Judges:

Mr L Samuels QC

Citations:

[2021] EWHC 440 (Fam)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, Human Rights

Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.659365