Category: Human Rights

News Group Newspapers Ltd and Others v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis: IPT 17 Dec 2015

This claim is brought against the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis by News Group Newspapers and three journalists employed by The Sun newspaper, Mr Tom Newton Dunn, the political editor, Mr Anthony France and Mr Craig Woodhouse in respect of four authorisations issued under s 22 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (‘RIPA’). The purpose of the authorisations was to enable the police to obtain communications data which might reveal the sources of information obtained by the journalists.
Held: the use of the s 22 power in this investigation was indeed both necessary and proportionate in respect of three out of the four authorisations challenged, but are compelled to hold that the legal regime in place at the relevant time did not adequately safeguard the important public interest in the right of a journalist to protect the identity of his source.

Judges:

Burton J P

Citations:

[2015] UKIPTrib 14 – 176-H

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 22

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Police, Human Rights, Media

Updated: 19 November 2022; Ref: scu.556982

H and H v The Police Federation of Great Britain: IPT 28 Feb 2005

IPT The Tribunal found that a police force’s use of covert surveillance against a police officer breached his Article 8 rights as it had no lawful authority for the surveillance activities it undertook (but its decision is overtaken by C v The Police (IPT/03/32) in 2006)

Citations:

[2005] UKIPTrib 03 – 23

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Police, Human Rights

Updated: 19 November 2022; Ref: scu.525994

Paton and Others v Poole Borough Council: IPT 6 Nov 2009

Commonly known as the ‘Poole’ judgment, the ruling details the Tribunal’s finding that it was not necessary nor proportionate for Poole Borough Council to undertake surveillance on a family in relation to school catchment areas.

Citations:

[2009] UKIPTrib 09 – 01

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Police, Human Rights

Updated: 19 November 2022; Ref: scu.525986

B v Security Service: IPT 31 Mar 2004

The ruling refers to an oral hearing held by the Tribunal on two preliminary issues of law, with regards to alleged conduct by the Security Service which is alleged to have been incompatible with Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Complainant was a Member of Parliament, who believed that the Security Service held files on him containing personal data relating to his activities with ecological groups some time in the past. The Tribunal ruled on whether or not the NCND principle was valid if personal data were or were not held by the public authority

Citations:

[2004] UKIPTrib 03 – 01

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Police, Human Rights

Updated: 19 November 2022; Ref: scu.525995

C v The Police: IPT 14 Jul 2006

This ruling relates to an open hearing held to determine whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction under RIPA to determine a claim made by a retired police officer against his former police force. The claim was for unlawful covert surveillance in breach of his right to respect for his private and family life and his home under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention) and section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 (the 1998 Act). The Tribunal ruled that, as the case related to the use of Private Investigators to undertake directed surveillance in relation to an employment dispute, no public interest would be served by giving the Tribunal exclusive jurisdiction over such a case. Therefore the Tribunal concluded this was not a case of directed surveillance within RIPA. It therefore fell outside the jurisdiction of the Tribunal.

Citations:

[2006] UKIPTrib 03 – 32

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Police, Human Rights

Updated: 19 November 2022; Ref: scu.525991

Mr and Mrs B v Department for Social Development: IPT 29 Jul 2011

In July 2010 the IPT made a finding in favour in this case of a husband and wife joint complaint against the Northern Ireland DSD. The DSD did not dispute that they mistakenly authorised surveillance to allow DSD officers to enter the complainants’ property posing as prospective house purchasers. This is the Tribunal’s decision on remedies. They ordered the quashing of the authorisation and for notes of the surveillance to be destroyed and then stated that the surveillance was a breach of the Complainants’ Article 8 rights.

Citations:

[2011] UKIPTrib 09 – 11

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Police, Human Rights, Northern Ireland

Updated: 19 November 2022; Ref: scu.525983

JL, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Defence: CA 30 Apr 2013

The defendant appealed against rejection of her claim for judicial review of an order for possession of her house, saying that it had failed to address issues of mandatory relevance and was disproportionate.

Judges:

Arden DBE, Sullivan, Briggs LJJ

Citations:

[2013] EWCA Civ 449

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Housing, Human Rights

Updated: 19 November 2022; Ref: scu.478063

Samsonnikov v Estonia: ECHR 3 Jul 2012

Citations:

52178/10, [2012] ECHR 1373

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Citing:

Summary – Samsonnikov v Estonia (Summary) ECHR 3-Jul-2012
ECHR Article 8
Expulsion
Expulsion of long-term resident following series of criminal convictions: no violation
Facts – The applicant was born in Estonia in 1978 and lived there on the basis of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 19 November 2022; Ref: scu.462236

ANS and Another v ML: SCS 21 Jun 2011

In adoption proceedings, ML refused her consent to the proposed adoption. She argued that the provision in the 1997 Act (allowing a court to dispense with her consent) was beynd the competence of the Scottish Parliament, and infringed her right to family life.

Judges:

Lord President, Lady Paton, Lord Kingarth

Citations:

[2011] ScotCS CSIH – 38, 2012 SC 8, 2011 GWD 21-482, 2011 SLT 1204, [2011] CSIH 38, 2011 Fam LR 106, 2012 SCLR 172

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Adoption (Scotland) Act 2007, Scotland Act 1998 29(2)(d), European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Cited by:

Appeal from – ANS and Another v ML SC 11-Jul-2012
The mother opposed adoption proceedings, and argued that the provision in the 2007 Act, allowing a court to dispense with her consent, infringed her rights under Article 8 and was therefore made outwith the powers of the Scottish Parliament.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Adoption, Human Rights, Constitutional

Updated: 19 November 2022; Ref: scu.441319

AB (Jamaica) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 6 Dec 2007

The claimant came here from Jamaica, but overstayed. She married a British citizen in 2001 and applied for leave to remain. That was refused.
Held: In refusing such a claim, the tribunal ought to have given respect to the husband’s human rights. As a result of the decision would either have to abandon his family or his home. The decision was flawed. Sedley LJ said: ‘In substance, albeit not in form, [the husband] was a party to the proceedings. It was as much his marriage as the appellant’s which was in jeopardy, and it was the impact of removal on him rather than on her which, given the lapse of years since the marriage, was now critical. From Strasbourg’s point of view, his Convention rights were as fully engaged as hers. He was entitled to something better than the cavalier treatment he received . . It cannot be permissible to give less than detailed and anxious consideration to the situation of a British citizen who has lived here all his life before it is held reasonable and proportionate to expect him to emigrate to a foreign country in order to keep his marriage intact.’

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 1302, [2007] UKHRR 1177, [2008] HRLR 17, [2008] 1 WLR 1893, [2008] Imm AR 306, [2008] INLR 83

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Beoku Betts v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 25-Jun-2008
The appellant had arrived from Sierra Leone and obtained student permits. When they expired he sought asylum, citing his family’s persecution after a coup, and that fact that other members of his family now had indefinite leave, and he said that an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Human Rights, Family

Updated: 19 November 2022; Ref: scu.261816

EM (Lebanon) v Secretary of State for the Home Dept: CA 21 Nov 2006

The asylum applicant said that if she was returned to her home country, she would be judged under Sharia law, and would thereby lose custody of her son, and this would deny her her right to family life.
Held: Any such loss would not be complete. She would retain visitation rights, and therefore the article was not infringed, even though her rights would be substantially restricted.

Judges:

Lord Justice Carnwath, Lord Justice Gage and Mr Justice Bodey

Citations:

Times 29-Nov-2006, [2006] EWCA Civ 1531, [2007] UKHRR 1, [2007] Imm AR 347, [2007] 1 FLR 991, [2007] Fam Law 398, (2006) 150 SJLB 1570, [2007] 3 FCR 1

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – EM (Lebanon) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 22-Oct-2008
The claimant challenged the respondent’s decision to order the return of herself and her son to Lebanon.
Held: The test for whether a claimant’s rights would be infringed to such an extent as to prevent their return home was a strict one, but . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 19 November 2022; Ref: scu.246339

Manoussakis and Others v Greece: ECHR 26 Sep 1996

Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); Violation of Art. 9; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses award – domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses award – Convention proceedings

Citations:

[1996] ECHR 41, 18748/91, (1997) 23 EHRR 387, 2 BHRC 110

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Blake v Associated Newspapers Ltd QBD 31-Jul-2003
The claimant, a former Anglican priest, sued in defamation. The defendant argued that the claim was non-justiciable since it would require the court to adjudicate on matters of faith and religious doctrine.
Held: The claim could not be heard. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 18 November 2022; Ref: scu.165447