Category: Human Rights

Regina (N) v Dr M and Others: CA 6 Dec 2002

The patient refused consent to treatment in the form of injection of drugs, which her psychiatrists considered to be necessary.
Held: Treatment of this nature infringed the patients rights, and was not to be ordered without clear reason. The doctors had to show that it was a medical necessity, and this had to be shown convincingly. The standard of proof was high, though not the criminal standard. To comply with Human Rights law, they also had to show that it was in her best interests. This is a wider test than medical necessity. Despite the applicant’s own expert’s opinion, the standard of proof had been reached in this case.
Dyson LJ said that cross-examination in judicial review cases should be ordered only if it is necessary to enable the court to determine factual issues for itself.

Judges:

Phillips of Worth Matravers MR, Rix, Dyson LJJ

Citations:

Times 12-Dec-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 1789, [2003] 1 WLR 562, [2003] Lloyd’s Rep Med 81, (2003) 72 BMLR 81, [2003] 1 FCR 124, [2003] 1 FLR 667, [2003] Fam Law 160

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 3, Mental Health Act 1983 58(3)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – In Re S (Adult Patient: Sterilisation) CA 26-May-2000
The court should decide what is in the best interests of a patient where she was unable to give consent herself. The test of whether what was proposed was within the range of what reasonable and competent medical practitioners might propose, got the . .
Cited – Herczegfalvy v Austria ECHR 24-Sep-1992
The applicant was detained in an institution for mentally deranged offenders. While so detained he was subjected to the forcible administration of food and neuroleptics and to handcuffing to a security bed. He complained of violation of his Article . .
Cited – Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee QBD 1957
Professional to use Skilled Persons Ordinary Care
Negligence was alleged against a doctor.
Held: McNair J directed the jury: ‘Where some special skill is exercised, the test for negligence is not the test of the man on the Clapham omnibus, because he has not got this special skill. The test . .
Cited – Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority HL 24-Jul-1997
The plaintiff suffered catastrophic brain damage as a result of cardiac arrest induced by respiratory failure as a child whilst at the defendant hospital. A doctor was summoned but failed to attend, and the child suffered cardiac arrest and brain . .
Cited – Regina (Wilkinson) v Broadmoor Special Hospital and Others CA 22-Oct-2001
A detained mental patient sought to challenge a decision by his RMO that he should receive anti-psychotic medication, despite his refusal to consent, and to challenge a certificate issued by the SOAD.
Held: Where a mental patient sought to . .

Cited by:

Cited – Munjaz v Mersey Care National Health Service Trust And the Secretary of State for Health, the National Association for Mental Health (Mind) Respondent interested; CA 16-Jul-2003
The claimant was a mental patient under compulsory detention, and complained that he had been subjected to periods of seclusion.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The hospital had failed to follow the appropriate Code of Practice. The Code was not . .
Cited – PS, Regina (on the Application of) v Responsible Medical Officer, Dr G and others Admn 10-Oct-2003
The claimant had been compulsorily detained under the Act. He complained that the detention and compulsory medication infringed his rights, and amongst other things breached his religious beliefs.
Held: This was an exceptional case requiring . .
Cited – MH, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Department of Health CA 3-Dec-2004
The patient had been detained under the Act and was incapable of making an application for her freedom.
Held: There was a duty on the state to ensure that mechanisms were made available to a patient to apply to review her continued detention . .
Cited – Regina (DJ) v Mental Health Review Tribunal; Regina (AN) v Mental Health Review Tribunal (Northern Region) Admn 11-Apr-2005
Each applicant sought judicial review of the refusal of the tribunal to authorise their release from detention under the 1983 Act, saying that the Tribunal had accepted evidence to a lower standard of proof.
Held: Neither the criminal standard . .
Cited – MH v Secretary of State for the Department of Health and others HL 20-Oct-2005
The appellant, detained for assessment under section 2, was too disabled to make an application to the court on her own behalf. After a dispute between her mother and the medical officer over her treatment, an application was made to the county . .
Cited – AN, Regina (on the Application of) v Mental Health Review Tribunal (Northern Region) and others CA 21-Dec-2005
The appellant was detained under section 37 of the 1983 Act as a mental patient with a restriction under section 41. He sought his release.
Held: The standard of proof in such applications remained the balance of probabilities, but that . .
Cited – B, Regina (on the Application Of) v SS (Responsible Medical Officer) and others CA 26-Jan-2006
The applicant had been detained after a diagnosis of Bipolar Affective Disorder and convictions for rape. He had applied for discharge, but before the hearing the doctor had said he no longer opposed his release. After the hearing but before being . .
Cited – Al-Sweady and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Defence Admn 2-Oct-2009
The claimant’s son had died whilst in the custody of the British Armed Forces in Iraq. His uncle now claimed that his human rights had been infringed. The case ‘raised a fundamental issue of jurisdiction under Article 1 of the ECHR because if the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Human Rights, Judicial Review

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178428

Regina v Ashton, Lyons and Webber: CACD 6 Dec 2002

The appellants had appealed sentences for conspiracy to murder. There had been an inordinate delay between leave to appeal having been granted, and the appeal being heard.
Held: The appellants’ rights had been infringed by the delay, and they had a right to redress. That could be satisfied by a reduction in the sentences of one year. This was however an exceptional case.

Judges:

Mantell LJ, Treacey, Simon JJ

Citations:

Times 10-Dec-2002, [2002] EWCA Crim 2782

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights Art 6.1

Citing:

Cited – Attorney General’s Reference (No 2 of 2001) CACD 12-Jul-2001
When assessing whether the defendant’s right to a trial within a reasonable time had been infringed, the court should look as from the date at which he was charged, or served with a summons, and not from the date of the first interview. Although a . .
Cited – Mills v HM Advocate and Another PC 22-Jul-2002
(The High Court of Justiciary) The defendant appealed on the basis that the delay in the sentencing process had resulted in an infringement of his human rights.
Held: The appeal itself had been without merit. The delay had been to such an . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina v Webber HL 22-Jan-2004
The defendant complained that the judge had given a direction under s34 even though his counsel had only put matters to witnesses for the prosecution.
Held: A positive suggestion put to a witness by or on behalf of a defendant may amount to a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178368

Regina (Pearson) v Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency and Another: QBD 6 Nov 2002

The appellant challenged the fact that the details of his conviction for driving with excess alcohol had not been removed from his driving licence despite it being a spent conviction under the 1974 Act. The result was that he had been unable to find work as a driver.
Held: The retention of the records was not a breach of the applicant’s human right to privacy. The article was not engaged, although he might have considered an action for breach of statutory duty.
The claimant objected to having to effectively disclose a road traffic conviction to a new employer where though it would be spent under the 1974 Act, the 1988 Act required details of it to remain on his driving licence.
Held: Article 8 was not engaged. Maurice Kay J spoke of the 1974 Act: ‘The Rehabilitation of Offenders Act confers certain privileges . . It does not attempt to go beyond the grant of those limited privileges to provide a right of confidentiality in respect of spent convictions. While the 1974 Act in some respects may place an individual with spent convictions in the same position as someone with no convictions, it does not do so by rendering the convictions confidential; it does so simply by putting in place a regime which protects an individual from being prejudiced by the existence of such convictions. For these reasons I reject the submission that the 1974 Act renders the appellant’s convictions confidential.’

Judges:

Maurice Kay J

Citations:

Times 18-Nov-2002, [2002] EWHC 2482 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Road Traffic Act 1988 44(1) 45(7), European Convention on Human Rights Art 8, Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974, Road Traffic Offenders Act 1974 45(7), European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – NT 1 and NT 2 v Google Llc QBD 13-Apr-2018
Right to be Forgotten is not absolute
The two claimants separately had criminal convictions from years before. They objected to the defendant indexing third party web pages which included personal data in the form of information about those convictions, which were now spent. The claims . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic, Human Rights, Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178196

Regina (on the application of Smith) v Barking and Dagenham London Borough Council and another: Admn 19 Nov 2002

The applicants sought to argue that the attempt to evict him from the caravan site he occupied infringed his article 8 and 14 rights. Though the Isaacs case had decided there was good reason to deny security, he argued that was no longer applicable, since many gypsies did not now seek a roving life.
Held: The onus of justifying an interference in the applicant’s human rights lay on the authorities. However, other arrangements did exist for those who wanted a more settled life. The earlier position remained appropriate. The different treatment of the applicants was justified in the pursuance of a legitimate aim.

Judges:

Burton J

Citations:

Gazette 28-Nov-2002, [2002] EWHC 2400 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Caravan Sites Act 1968 Part 1, European Convention on Human Rights 8 14

Citing:

Cited – Somerset County Council v Isaacs Admn 24-May-2002
. .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State For Employment Ex Parte Seymour-Smith and Another (No 2) HL 17-Feb-2000
Although fewer men were affected by the two year qualifying period before becoming entitled not to be dismissed unfairly, the difference was objectively justified by the need to encourage employers to take staff on, and was not directly derived from . .
Cited – Hooper and others v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions Admn 14-Feb-2002
The claimants alleged that the way they were treated as widowers under the benefits subjected them to discrimination.
Held: The continued payment of widow’s pension was objectively justified. . .
Cited – Michalak v London Borough of Wandsworth CA 6-Mar-2002
The appellant had occupied for a long time a room in a house let by the authority. After the death of the tenant, the appellant sought, but was refused, a statutory tenancy. He claimed to be a member of the tenant’s family, and that the list of . .

Cited by:

Cited – Wrexham County Borough v The National Assembly of Wales, Michael Berry, Florence Berry CA 19-Jun-2003
A traditional gypsy family had settled because of ill health, and sought to establish a caravan site. The authority claimed they were no longer to be treated as Gypsy and having the entitlement under the Act.
Held: The Act defined ‘Gypsies’ as . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Housing

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178301

E and Others v The United Kingdom: ECHR 26 Nov 2002

The four applicants had been abused by their stepfather, and sought investigation of the local authority for failing to protect them. They had been compensated by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority in part, but now sought a remedy from the local authority ombudsman who denied jurisdiction.
Held: Social services should have been aware of the situation, and of the abuser’s history. The pattern of lack of investigation communication and co-operation by them influenced the course of events, and article 3 had been infringed. The Ombudsman’s lack of jurisdiction had no remedy in domestic law, and certain grievances of the complainants were unresolved. Article 13 had been infringed. ‘The Government submitted that it was not correct to assert that this House of Lords decision [in X v Bedfordshire, M v Newham, et al] prevented all claims in negligence against local authorities in the exercise of their child protection duties, and argued that it could not be regarded as beyond doubt that these applicants would have failed as, in the case of these applicants, the social services arguably were negligent in the way they approached operational, as well as policy, matters.’

Citations:

Times 04-Dec-2002, Gazette 16-Jan-2003, 33218/96, [2002] ECHR 763, [2002] ECHR 769

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 3 13

Cited by:

Cited – JD v East Berkshire Community Health NHS Trust and others HL 21-Apr-2005
Parents of children had falsely and negligently been accused of abusing their children. The children sought damages for negligence against the doctors or social workers who had made the statements supporting the actions taken. The House was asked if . .
Cited – Plymouth City Council v HM Coroner for the County of Devon and Another Admn 27-May-2005
The local authority in whose care the deceased child had been held challenged a decision by the coroner not to limit his inquiry to the last few days of the child’s life. The coroner had decided that he had an obligation to conduct a wider enquiry . .
Cited – Van Colle v Hertfordshire Police QBD 10-Mar-2006
The claimants claimed for the estate of their murdered son. He had been waiting to give evidence in a criminal trial, and had asked the police for support having received threats. Other witnesses had also suffered intimidation including acts of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Local Government

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178287

Regina v Cairns; Regina v Zaldi, Regina v Chaudary: CACD 22 Nov 2002

The defendants applied for the defence statements of co-defendants to be disclosed. A co-defendant was to give evidence for the Crown, and they sought to have it excluded as unreliable.
Held: The 1996 Act created a duty of secondary disclosure, where a defence statement might be of assistance to the co-defendants. Actual disclosure remained for the judgement of the prosecution. A court was not under a duty not to admit evidence which might be in whole or in part unreliable. It was necessary to construe legislation to accord with a defendant’s human rights, and the statements should have been disclosed.
The defendants had been convicted of conspiracy to supply class A drugs. Two defendants appealed saying that court had been wrong to suggest that a co-defendant’s evidence was reliable as regards themselves, but unreliable as regards other witnesses. Mrs Cairns said that she had acted under the marital coercion of the same witness.
Held: ‘The prosecution may properly call a witness when they rely on one part of his evidence but not on another part. Whether they choose to call such a witness is a matter for their discretion . . But that does not amount to an attack on their own witness’s credit.’
In the light of that the prosecution was entitled to exercise its discretion, as it did. It was not a perverse or unreasonable exercise of discretion and the judge was right not to interfere with it. Nor was the calling Barry Cairns an abuse of process. The court had followed the Makanjuola guidelines, and the appeal on that basis failed.
The judge had exercised a proper discretion in not allowing separate trials.
As to the defence of marital coercion, the judge’s direction was incorrect as to the meaning of coercion in not allowing clearly that such coercion may operate without physical violence. Also, following Jespers, the court should have disclosed the defence statements of two of the co-accusd since this would have assisted Mrs Cairns in her defence. Her appeal was allowed, but not that of the co-defendants.

Judges:

Keene, LJ, Forbes, Rant JJ

Citations:

Times 02-Dec-2002, Gazette 23-Jan-2003, [2002] EWCA Crim 2838, [2002] 1 WLR 796, [2003] Crim LR 403, [2003] 1 Cr App Rep 38

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Human Rights Act 1998 3(1), Criminal Justice Act 1967 17, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 78, Criminal Justice Act 1925 47, Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 5(5) 7(2

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Pacey CACD 3-Mar-1994
The prosecutor invited the jury to convict contrary to the evidence of his own witness. The Crown had called a witness to establish a crucial fact, as it saw it, that the knife used in the killing on the ground floor had been kept upstairs and . .
Cited – Regina v Brown and Brown CACD 1997
The court discussed the duties on the prosecutor as to the calling of evidence, saying: ‘Counsel for the prosecution enjoys a discretion whether to call or to tender a particular witness whom he has required to attend. Further, counsel may refuse . .
Cited – Regina v Russell-Jones CACD 1995
The Crown cannot be required to adduce evidence which (or to tender for cross-examination a witness whose evidence) is not capable of belief: ‘. . . the prosecution ought normally to call or offer to call all the witnesses who give direct evidence . .
Cited – Regina v Lake CACD 1976
Subject to a judge’s discretion to order separate trials in the interests of justice, there are powerful public reasons why joint offences should be tried jointly. . .
Cited – Regina v Miller 1952
The fact that a defendant has previous convictions is not normally relevant: ‘The fundamental principle, equally applicable to any question that is asked by the defence as to any question that is asked by the prosecution, is that it is not normally . .
Cited – Regina v Makanjuola CACD 17-May-1995
Guidance was given on the directions to be given to the jury where a co-accused speaks for prosecution as a witness and in sexual assault cases. The full corroboration warning is not now needed; the Judge may use his own discretion, and may give a . .
Cited – Regina v Shortland CACD 23-May-1995
The defendant had made a false statement in order to obtain the issue of a passport. She had signed in the name of a deceased child, but claimed that she had been non-violently coerced by her husband.
Held: Coercion of a wife by her husband . .
Cited – Jespers v Belgium ECHR 1981
ECHR (Commission) Article 6, paragraph I of the Convention
(a) A virulent press campaign can, in certain circumstances, adversely affect the fairness of a trial and involve the State’s responsibility, . .
Cited – Regina v Tibbs CACD 28-Feb-2000
The meaning of a defence as included in a defence statement refers to a defence in its general sense. Where the facts supporting a defence statement differed when the matter came to trial it was correct for the defendant to be cross-examined about . .

Cited by:

Cited – David McHugh, Regina v CACD 20-Jun-2003
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Human Rights, Criminal Evidence, Crime

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178304

Mastromatteo v Italy: ECHR 24 Oct 2002

The deceased had been a bystander killed by a group of criminals, some of whom were on leave of absence from prison and one of whom had absconded from prison. A complaint was made by the applicant that there had been a breach of the positive duty to protect her son’s life in that the Italian authorities had granted prison leave to very dangerous criminals. The criminals did not pose a particular risk to the applicant’s son; they posed a risk to the lives of the public at large.
Held: A complaint that the state had violated its substantive obligation under article 2 was rejected. The form of investigation by a state into a death might vary according to the circumstances. In the sphere of negligence a civil or disciplinary remedy might suffice. In an investigation for which State agents or authorities are allegedly responsible, it is necessary for the persons responsible for the investigation to be independent from those implicated in the events. This meant hierarchical or institutional independence and also practical independence.
‘The situation examined in the Osman and Paul and Audrey Edwards cases concerned the requirement of personal protection of one or more individuals identifiable in advance as the potential target of a lethal act.
The instant case differs from those cases in that it is not a question here of determining whether the responsibility of the authorities is engaged for failing to provide personal protection to A. Mastromatteo; what is at issue is the obligation to afford general protection to society against the potential acts of one or of several persons serving a prison sentence for a violent crime and the determination of the scope of that protection.’

Judges:

Wildhaber P

Citations:

37703/97, [2002] ECHR 694

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 2

Citing:

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 by:

Cited – Khan, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health CA 10-Oct-2003
The claimant’s child had died as a result of negligence in hospital. The parents had been told the result of police investigation and decision not to prosecute, and the hospital’s own investigation, but had not been sufficiently involved. There . .
Cited – Middleton, Regina (on the Application of) v Coroner for the Western District of Somerset HL 11-Mar-2004
The deceased had committed suicide in prison. His family felt that the risk should have been known to the prison authorities, and that they had failed to guard against that risk. The coroner had requested an explanatory note from the jury.
Cited – Plymouth City Council v HM Coroner for the County of Devon and Another Admn 27-May-2005
The local authority in whose care the deceased child had been held challenged a decision by the coroner not to limit his inquiry to the last few days of the child’s life. The coroner had decided that he had an obligation to conduct a wider enquiry . .
Cited – Birks, Regina (On the Application of) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis Admn 25-Sep-2014
The claimant police officer sought judicial review of a decision to continue his suspension. He had been investigated and cleared after a death in custody. He sought to join the Church of England Ministry and was offered a post. He was re-assured . .
Cited – Sarjantson v Humberside Police CA 18-Oct-2013
The claimant had been severely injured in an attack by a group of young men. He said that the defendant had failed in its duty to protect him and his family. He now appealed against the action being struck out.
Held: the judge’s interpretation . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Police

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.177909

Regina (Crown Prosecution Service) v Chorley Justices: Admn 9 Oct 2002

The prosecution had requested the magistrates to impose on the defendant as a condition of his bail, a requirement that when so requested by a police officer checking that he was at home and otherwise complying with the bail condition, he should come to door.
Held: The ‘doorstep’ condition was validly imposed. The Act gave the magistrates the power to impose such conditions as appeared to them to be necessary to secure the defendant’s appearance at court. The defendant’s article 5 and 8 rights were engaged, the procedure was clear, accessible, and proportionate.

Judges:

Latham, McCombe JJ

Citations:

Times 22-Oct-2002, Gazette 07-Nov-2002, [2002] EWHC 2162 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Bail Act 1976 3(6), European Convention on Human Rights 5 8

Criminal Practice, Magistrates, Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.177479

Pierce v Society of Sisters: 1925

(Supreme Court) Justice McReynolds said: ‘The fundamental theory of liberty upon which all governments in this Union repose excludes any general power of the state to standardize its children by forcing them to accept instruction from public teachers only. The child is not the mere creature of the state; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations.’

Judges:

Justice McReynolds

Citations:

268 US 510 (1925)

Jurisdiction:

United States

Cited by:

Cited – The Christian Institute and Others v The Lord Advocate SC 28-Jul-2016
(Scotland) By the 2014 Act, the Scottish Parliament had provided that each child should have a named person to monitor that child’s needs, with information about him or her shared as necessary. The Institute objected that the imposed obligation to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.628559

El-Al Israel Airlines Ltd v Danielowitz, National Labour Court: 30 Nov 1994

(Israel) ( Supreme Court sitting as the High Court of Justice) Justice Barak said: ‘The factual premise is that people are different from one another, ‘no person is completely identical to another’ . . Every person is a world in himself. Society is based on people who are different from one another. Only the worst dictatorships try to eradicate these differences.’

Judges:

Justice Barak

Citations:

HCJ 721/94, [1992-4] IsrLR 478

Links:

Cardozo

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – The Christian Institute and Others v The Lord Advocate SC 28-Jul-2016
(Scotland) By the 2014 Act, the Scottish Parliament had provided that each child should have a named person to monitor that child’s needs, with information about him or her shared as necessary. The Institute objected that the imposed obligation to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International, Human Rights, Discrimination

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.628558

Roberts, Regina (on the application of) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis and another: SC 17 Dec 2015

The Court considered the validity of suspicionless stop and search activities under s 60 of the 1994 Act, by police officers.
Held: The claimant’s appeal failed. The safeguards attending the use of the s 60 power, and in particular the requirements to give reasons both for the authorisation and for the stop and search, make it possible to judge whether the power has been exercised lawfully. Both the power and the particular search of Mrs Roberts were in accordance with the law.

Judges:

Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Clarke, Lord Reed, Lord Toulson, Lord Hodge

Citations:

[2015] UKSC 79, [2016] 1 Cr App R 19, [2016] 1 WLR 210, [2015] WLR(D) 536, 41 BHRC 93, [2016] Crim LR 278, [2016] 2 All ER 1005, [2016] HRLR 5, UKSC 2014/0138

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary, WLRD

Statutes:

Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 60, European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Thompson v Commissioner of Police of Metropolis; Hsu v Same CA 20-Feb-1997
CS Damages of 200,000 pounds by way of exemplary damages had been awarded against the police for unlawful arrest and assault.
Held: The court gave a guideline maximum pounds 50,000 award against police for . .
Cited – HL v United Kingdom ECHR 10-Sep-2002
(Admissibility) Whether a detention amounts to a deprivation of liberty depends upon all the facts and circumstances of the particular case . .
At First Instance – Roberts, Regina (on The Application of) v The Commissioner of The Metropolitan Police Admn 17-Jul-2012
The claimant challenged the legality of section 60 of the 1994 Act as an interference in her article 8 rights. She had been caught on a bus without her fare and gave a false name and address. A direction had been given authorising any person to be . .
Cited – Lumba (WL) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 23-Mar-2011
The claimants had been detained under the 1971 Act, after completing sentences of imprisonment pending their return to their home countries under deportations recommended by the judges at trial, or chosen by the respondent. They challenged as . .
Appeal from – Roberts, Regina (on The Application of) v The Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis and Others CA 4-Feb-2014
The claimant asserted that the provisions of section 60 of the 1994 Act, which allowed personal searches by police officers where no suspicion of misbehaviour was present, infringed her rights under Article 8 of the Convention.
Held: The . .
Cited – Beghal v Director of Public Prosecutions SC 22-Jul-2015
Questions on Entry must be answered
B was questioned at an airport under Schedule 7 to the 2000 Act, and required to answer questions asked by appropriate officers for the purpose set out. She refused to answer and was convicted of that refusal , contrary to paragraph 18 of that . .
Cited – Gillan, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Another HL 8-Mar-2006
The defendants said that the stop and search powers granted under the 2000 Act were too wide, and infringed their human rights. Each had been stopped when innocently attending demonstrations in London, and had been effectively detained for about . .
Cited – T and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Another SC 18-Jun-2014
T and JB, asserted that the reference in certificates issued by the state to cautions given to them violated their right to respect for their private life under article 8 of the Convention. T further claims that the obligation cast upon him to . .
Cited – Ferdinand Jozef Colon v The Netherlands ECHR 15-May-2012
Acting under the Municipalities Act, with the authority of a byelaw passed by the local council, the Burgomaster of Amsterdam designated most of the old centre of Amsterdam as a security risk area for a period of six months and again for a further . .
Cited – Jackson v Stevenson 1897
At common law, it is contrary to constitutional principle and illegal to search someone to establish whether there are grounds for an arrest . .
Cited – O’Loughlin v Chief Constable of Essex CA 12-Dec-1997
Police, when using force to enter premises, must still give their reasons for effecting their entry, to the occupant, unless this was impossible or undesirable.
Buxton LJ said: ‘This paragraph strictly speaking did not apply in the present . .
Cited – Abrahams v Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis CA 8-Dec-2000
The claimant had been arrested for swearing at a police officer. After her arrest, the claimant made admissions to secure a caution, rather than risk prosecution. She later sought to begin a civil action for damages against the police in the course . .
Cited – Brooks v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and others HL 21-Apr-2005
The claimant was with Stephen Lawrence when they were both attacked and Mr Lawrence killed. He claimed damages for the negligent way the police had dealt with his case, and particularly said that they had failed to assess him as a victim of crime, . .
Cited – Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis v ZH CA 14-Feb-2013
The claimant was a young epileptic and autistic adult. On a supervised trip to a swimming pool, he became fascinated by the water, and the pool staff called the police. Through the police misunderstanding his needs, he ended up first in the water . .

Cited by:

Cited – The Christian Institute and Others v The Lord Advocate SC 28-Jul-2016
(Scotland) By the 2014 Act, the Scottish Parliament had provided that each child should have a named person to monitor that child’s needs, with information about him or her shared as necessary. The Institute objected that the imposed obligation to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.556983

Schrems v Data Protection Commissioner, Digital Rights Ireland Ltd: ECJ 6 Oct 2015

ECJ Grand Chamber – Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Personal data – Protection of individuals with regard to the processing of such data – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Articles 7, 8 and 47 – Directive 95/46/EC – Articles 25 and 28 – Transfer of personal data to third countries – Decision 2000/520/EC – Transfer of personal data to the United States – Inadequate level of protection – Validity – Complaint by an individual whose data has been transferred from the European Union to the United States – Powers of the national supervisory authorities

Judges:

V Skouris, P

Citations:

C-362/14, [2015] EUECJ C-362/14, ECLI:EU:C:2015:650, [2016] QB 527

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Decision 2000/520/EC, Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union 7 8 47, Directive 95/46/EC 25 28

Jurisdiction:

European

Citing:

Opinion – Schrems v Data Protection Commissioner ECJ 23-Sep-2015
ECJ Opinion – Preliminary reference – personal data – Protection of individuals with regard to the processing of these data – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Articles 7, 8 and 47 – Directive . .

Cited by:

Cited – The Christian Institute and Others v The Lord Advocate SC 28-Jul-2016
(Scotland) By the 2014 Act, the Scottish Parliament had provided that each child should have a named person to monitor that child’s needs, with information about him or her shared as necessary. The Institute objected that the imposed obligation to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Information, Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.553103

Volker Und Markus Schecke v Land Hessen (Approximation Of Laws): ECJ 9 Nov 2010

ECJ (Grand Chamber) Protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data – Publication of information on beneficiaries of agricultural aid – Validity of the provisions of European Union law providing for that publication and laying down detailed rules for such publication – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Articles 7 and 8 – Directive 95/46/EC – Interpretation of Articles 18 and 20
The limitations which may lawfully be placed on the right to the protection of personal data correspond to those tolerated in relation to article 8 of the ECHR.

Judges:

V Skouris, P

Citations:

[2010] EUECJ C-93/09, [2010] ECR I-11063, [2012] All ER (EC) 127, ECLI:EU:C:2010:662

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union 7 8, Directive 95/46/EC 18 20

Jurisdiction:

European

Citing:

Opinion – Volker Und Markus Schecke v Land Hessen (Approximation Of Laws) ECJ 17-Jun-2010
ECJ (Opinion) Protection of individuals regarding the treatment of personal data – Publication of information on beneficiaries of funds deriving from the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund and the European . .

Cited by:

Cited – The Christian Institute and Others v The Lord Advocate SC 28-Jul-2016
(Scotland) By the 2014 Act, the Scottish Parliament had provided that each child should have a named person to monitor that child’s needs, with information about him or her shared as necessary. The Institute objected that the imposed obligation to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Information, Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.512156

Stoyanovi v Bulgaria: ECHR 9 Nov 2010

The court rejected an application made by the family of a soldier who died during a parachute exercise, drawing a distinction between risks which a soldier must expect as an incident of his ordinary military duties and ”dangerous’ situations of specific threat to life which arise exceptionally from risks posed by violent, unlawful acts of others or man-made or natural hazards’. An operational obligation would only arise in the latter situation.

Citations:

42980/04, [2010] ECHR 1782

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Rabone and Another v Pennine Care NHS Foundation SC 8-Feb-2012
The claimant’s daughter had committed suicide whilst on home leave from a hospital where she had stayed as a voluntary patient with depression. Her admission had followed a suicide attempt. The hospital admitted negligence but denied that it owed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.426010

Re C (A child): CA 2002

A family residential assessment was considered. A residential hospital assessment was recommended, but the authority proposed a less expensive local assessment. The parents sought an order under section 38(6) for the recommended assessment. The judge thought the recommended option preferable, but ordered the local assessment out of considerations of cost.
Held: The parents’ appeal was allowed. Cost was only one factor, though an important one. A local authority making a proposal based on cost must provide cogent evidence, and might include consideration of the alternatives, including shared funding. The family’s human rights had been engaged, and the judge had been wrong to go ahead on untested written evidence.

Citations:

[2002] 1 FLR 545

Statutes:

Children Act 1989 38(6)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Children, Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.228158

Hammond, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Admn 25 Nov 2004

The defendant had heard that the sentencing judge would set his sentence tarriff without an oral hearing, and would then give his decision in open court. He sought judicial review.
Held: Review was granted. The availability of a right of appeal was not of itself sufficient to justify a declaration of incompatibility for a section whose procedure did not respect the applicant’s human rights. Paragraph 11 might prevent a judge from holding a hearing where he thought one was necessary to satisfy the applicant’s rights to a fair trial, and must be read to be subject to a condition permitting a discretion to the judge to hold an oral hearing. A judge might occasionally exercise a discretion to hold an oral hearing.

Judges:

Thomas LJ, Richards J, Fulford J

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 2753 (Admin), Times 06-Dec-2004, [2005] 4 All ER 1127

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Human Rights Act 1998 3(1), Criminal Justice Act 2003 Sch 22 p11

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – De Cubber v Belgium ECHR 26-Oct-1984
The applicant a Belgian, had been convicted of forgery. He said that the court had not been an impartial tribunal because one of the judges had also acted as an investigating judge in his case. Amongst the grounds on which it was contended that . .
Cited – Easterbrook v The United Kingdom ECHR 12-Jun-2003
The prisoner was convicted of an armed robbery in which a policeman had been shot, and had been sentenced to life imprisonment. The judge set no tariff himself. The tariff was set by the Home Secretary, but only after some time. The discretionary . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex parte Anderson HL 25-Nov-2002
The appellant had been convicted of double murder. The judge imposed a mandatory life sentence with a minimum recommended term. The Home Secretary had later increased the minimum term under the 1997 Act. The appellant challenged that increase.
Cited – Regina v A (Complainant’s Sexual History) (No 2) HL 17-May-2001
The fact of previous consensual sex between complainant and defendant could be relevant in a trial of rape, and a refusal to allow such evidence could amount to a denial of a fair trial to a defendant. Accordingly, where the evidence was so relevant . .
Cited – De Cubber v Belgium ECHR 26-Oct-1984
The applicant a Belgian, had been convicted of forgery. He said that the court had not been an impartial tribunal because one of the judges had also acted as an investigating judge in his case. Amongst the grounds on which it was contended that . .
Cited – Colozza v Italy ECHR 12-Feb-1985
The defendant complained that he had been tried and convicted in his absence.
Held: The right to a fair trial had been breached: ‘the object and purpose of [article 6] taken as a whole show that a person ‘charged with a criminal offence’ is . .
Cited – Goc v Turkey ECHR 9-Nov-2000
The applicant had claimed compensation for unlawful detention and mistreatment during that detention; although the proceedings were civil in nature, they were governed by the code of criminal procedure. The applicant was not given an oral hearing . .
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 – Findlay v The United Kingdom ECHR 25-Feb-1997
The applicant complained that the members of a court-martial were appointed by the Convening Officer, who was closely linked to the prosecuting authorities. The members of the court-martial were subordinate in rank to the Convening Officer who had . .
Cited – Regina (Smith) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; and similar CA 11-Feb-2004
The applicants were young persons who had been detained during Her Majesty’s Pleasure after convictions for murder. The respondent appealed a finding that he was under a duty to review the tariff with a view to release even before the expiry of the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Tangney v The Governor of HMP Elmley and Another CA 29-Jul-2005
The claimant was a serving a life sentence. During prison disciplinary proceedings he was refused legal and other assistance, and an outside tribunal on the basis that since any finding would not lead to any loss of remission or extra time, his . .
Appeal from – Hammond, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 1-Dec-2005
The claimants had been convicted of murder, but their tariffs had not yet been set when the 2003 Act came into effect. They said that the procedure under which their sentence tarriffs were set were not compliant with their human rights in that the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Prisons, Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.219931

AA Lawal v Northern Spirit Limited: CA 9 Aug 2002

The appellant had had his case considered by the Employment Appeal Tribunal. He complained that his opponent had been represented in court by an advocate who himself sat part time in the EAT, and that this would lead to undue weight and respect being given to his arguments, so as to bias the tribunal. One of the EAT panel had previously sat on another panel with his opponent’s representative.
Held: The test was an objective one, whether a reasonable observer would see a risk of bias. The system of appointing part time members to the panel was appropriate and helpful. The reasonable observer must be assumed to be informed, and to make appropriate enquiries before reaching a conclusion. The system did include some measures to protect against this risk. In this case there were no additional ties between the representative and any member of the panel. (majority opinion)

Judges:

Lord Justice Mummery, Phillips MR, Pill LJ

Citations:

Times 07-Nov-2002, Gazette 28-Nov-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 327

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Porter and Weeks v Magill HL 13-Dec-2001
Councillors Liable for Unlawful Purposes Use
The defendant local councillors were accused of having sold rather than let council houses in order to encourage an electorate which would be more likely to be supportive of their political party. They had been advised that the policy would be . .
Cited – In re Medicaments and Related Classes of Goods (No 4) CA 26-Jul-2001
The parties had expended very considerable sums preparing for a hearing. The hearing became abortive when it was questioned whether a member of the court had given the appearance of bias. The parties sought payment of their wasted costs from the . .
Cited – Scanfuture UK Ltd, J M Link v K Bird J M Link C J Bennett Secretary of State for Department of Trade, Secretary of State for Department of Trade EAT 23-Mar-2001
The new system of appointment of lay members of employment tribunals is compliant with the right to a fair trial before an independent tribunal, particularly now where the Secretary of State had an interest in the proceedings. The Secretary had had . .
Appealed to – Lawal v Northern Spirit Limited HL 19-Jun-2003
Counsel appearing at the tribunal had previously sat as a judge with a tribunal member. The opposing party asserted bias in the tribunal.
Held: The test in Gough should be restated in part so that the court must first ascertain all the . .
Appeal from – Lawal v Northern Spirit Ltd EAT 6-Oct-1999
The applicant objected that one of the lay members of the Appeal Tribunal had, on other occasions, sat with a recorder who, as counsel, was appearing for a party in that appeal.
Held: There was no real possibility of bias from this scenario. . .
Application for leave – Lawal v Northern Spirit Ltd CA 15-Jan-2002
Application for leave to appeal . .
See Also – Lawal v Northern Spirit Ltd EAT 15-Feb-1999
The appellant wished to pursue an appeal against the striking out of his claim, and objected that contrary to the Rules, a member of the board who had heard the pre-hearing review had also sat on the full hearing.
Held: The appeal should be . .
See Also – Lawal v Northern Spirit Ltd EAT 15-Jan-2001
. .
See Also – Lawal v Northern Spirit Ltd EAT 15-Jan-2002
EAT Procedural Issues – Employment Appeal Tribunal. . .
See Also – Lawal v Northern Spirit Ltd EAT 15-Jan-2002
. .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Lawal v Northern Spirit Limited HL 19-Jun-2003
Counsel appearing at the tribunal had previously sat as a judge with a tribunal member. The opposing party asserted bias in the tribunal.
Held: The test in Gough should be restated in part so that the court must first ascertain all the . .
Full Appeal – Lawal v Northern Spirit Ltd CA 15-Jan-2002
Application for leave to appeal . .
Cited – Lawal v Northern Spirit Ltd CA 30-Oct-2002
. .
See Also – Lawal v Northern Spirit Ltd CA 19-Feb-2004
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Employment

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174768

Pauline Eunice Tangiora v Wellington District Legal Services Committee: PC 4 Oct 1999

PC (New Zealand) The appellants claimed that their treatment by the respondent infringed their human rights as guaranteed by the respondents signing the Convenant. They wanted to apply to the International Committee for relief, and applied to the respondent for legal aid. The respondent said it had no power to award legal aid for proceedings outside New Zealand.
Held: The issue was decided by whether the Committee constituted a judicial authority within the New Zealand legal aid statute. The Act set out a detaled list of courts for which legal aid could be granted. The Committee was not included. The Committee had chosen its name because it was not adjudicative, although its members were judges of the highest standing.
Held: The Board doubted that the Committee could be described as non-adjudicative, but eth issue was decided by the fact that it was not listed within the Act.

Judges:

Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Steyn, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Hutton, Lord Millett

Citations:

[1999] UKPC 42

Links:

Bailii, PC

Statutes:

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights First Protocol

Citing:

Cited – Arbitrators’ Institute of New Zealand Inc v Legal Services Board 1995
(New Zealand) A dispute had been referred to arbitration, and the question was whether a private arbitrator was a ‘judicial authority’.
Held: In their natural and ordinary meaning those words referred to a person or body: ‘ . . having power . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174622

Sengupta v Holmes and Others, Lord Chancellor intervening: CA 31 Jul 2002

The appellant had applied for leave to appeal to a single judge, who had refused the application. He appealed and was granted leave by two judges. He then objected when the single judge who had refused leave was included in the panel of judges to hear the substantive appeal.
Held: There was no reason to ask the judge to be recused. The test for bias had been set down in the In re Medicaments case, and confirmed in Magill. The judge had heard representations, and made a decision which he knew would be re-argued in full at a full appeal hearing, and that a different decision might then be reached. There was no reasonable basis for thinking he would not approach a full hearing with an open mind.

Judges:

Lord Justice Laws, Lord Justice Jonathan Parker and Lord Justice Keene

Citations:

Times 19-Aug-2002, Gazette 10-Oct-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 1104

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 52.3, European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – In re Medicaments and Related Classes of Goods (No 4) CA 26-Jul-2001
The parties had expended very considerable sums preparing for a hearing. The hearing became abortive when it was questioned whether a member of the court had given the appearance of bias. The parties sought payment of their wasted costs from the . .
Cited – Porter and Weeks v Magill HL 13-Dec-2001
Councillors Liable for Unlawful Purposes Use
The defendant local councillors were accused of having sold rather than let council houses in order to encourage an electorate which would be more likely to be supportive of their political party. They had been advised that the policy would be . .

Cited by:

Cited – Cairnstores Ltd Generics (UK) Ltd and Another v Aktiebolaget Hassle CA 22-Oct-2002
Two patents had been invaildated for obviousness. They related to coatings on medicinal pills. The patent holder said the judge’s interruptions indicated bias.
Held: The sumissions were unjustified. The interventions were by no means . .
Cited – Al-Hasan, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 16-Feb-2005
Prisoners were disciplined after refusing to be squat searched, saying that the procedure was humiliating and that there were no reasonable grounds to suspect them of any offence against prison discipline. The officer who had been involved in . .
Cited – Grace, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department CA 9-Jun-2014
What is ‘totally without merit’?
The claimant had sought judicial review. Her case had been certified as being ‘totally without merit’, thus denying to her any opportunity to renew her application for leave at an oral hearing, leaving only recourse to a judge of the Court of Appeal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Civil Procedure Rules, Natural Justice, Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174714

Regina (on the Application of Kanagasingham Kariharan and Kanagara) v Secretary of State for the Home Office: CA 30 Jul 2002

The applicants were subject to removal directions following the failures of their applications for asylum had failed. The decisions were made before the Human Rights Act came into effect, but the direction orders were made afterwards. They sought to challenge the directions on Human Rights grounds.
Held: They had a right of appeal since the removal directions were decisions under the Immigration Acts being decisions affecting the applicants right to enter into or remain in the UK. The decisions exercised a discretion, and were freestanding and themselves subject to the Human Rights Act.

Judges:

Lord Justice Auld, Lord Justice Sedley, Lord Justice Arden

Citations:

Times 13-Aug-2002, Gazette 03-Oct-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 1102, [2003] QB 933

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 65, Human Rights Act 1998

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See also – Kariharan and Another, Regina (on the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Home Department CA 15-Apr-2002
There is a right of appeal against removal directions under section 65 of the 1999 Act on the ground that removal would be in breach of a person’s human rights. Auld LJ was not impressed by an argument that a restrictive interpretation was necessary . .

Cited by:

Cited – BA (Nigeria) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Others SC 26-Nov-2009
The court was asked whether the expression ‘an asylum claim, or a human rights claim’ in section 92(4)(a) of the 2002 Act includes any second or subsequent claim that the asylum seeker may make, or only a second or subsequent claim which has been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174435

Adams and Others v Lord Advocate: IHCS 31 Jul 2002

(Opinion) The applicants challenged the introduction of restrictions of hunting by foxes, arguing that the law would infringe their human rights.
Held: The Act was not infringing. Fox hunting as such was not a private activity protected by the Convention, and the interference with property rights was justified by the balancing interest of preventing cruelty to animals. The discrimination which was necessarily part of the engagement of the applicant’s human rights, was justified.
The complaint that the Act was ultra vires the parliament also failed. It was wrong to import the common law concepts in considering the competence of the Scottish Parliament.

Judges:

Lord Nimmo Smith

Citations:

Times 08-Aug-2002, [2002] ScotCS 344, 2002 SCLR 881, 2003 SLT 366, 2002 GWD 26-879, [2002] UKHRR 1189, 2003 SC 171

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8 14 1st protocol, Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Act 2002, Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Act 2002 (Commencement) Order 2002

Citing:

Cited – Klass And Others v Germany ECHR 6-Sep-1978
(Plenary Court) The claimant objected to the disclosure by the police of matters revealed during their investigation, but in this case, it was held, disclosure even after the event ‘might well jeopardise the long-term purpose that originally . .
Cited – Young, James And Webster v The United Kingdom ECHR 18-Oct-1982
Hudoc Judgment (Just satisfaction) Pecuniary damage – financial award; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses award – Convention proceedings
ECHR . .
Cited – Krone Verlag Gmbh and Co Kg v Austria ECHR 26-Feb-2002
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 10; Pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses award – domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses award – Convention proceedings; . .
Cited – Norris v Ireland ECHR 26-Oct-1988
A homosexual man complained that the criminalisation of homosexual conduct in Ireland violated his article 8 right to respect for his private life, although he accepted that the risk of being prosecuted was remote.
Held: The court accepted . .
Cited – Purcell v Ireland ECHR 16-Apr-1991
The applicants were several individuals and two trades unions who complained that a ministerial order made under legislation relating to broadcasting infringed their rights under Article 10 of the Convention.
Held: The Commission rejected the . .
Cited – Chassagnou and Others v France ECHR 29-Apr-1999
A law permitted local authorities to oblige landowners to transfer hunting rights over private land to approved hunting associations. The landowners could not prevent hunting on their property. Landowners so affected were made members automatically . .
Cited – Handyside v The United Kingdom ECHR 7-Dec-1976
Freedom of Expression is Fundamental to Society
The appellant had published a ‘Little Red Schoolbook’. He was convicted under the 1959 and 1964 Acts on the basis that the book was obscene, it tending to deprave and corrupt its target audience, children. The book claimed that it was intended to . .

Cited by:

Cited – Imperial Tobacco Ltd v The Lord Advocate SC 12-Dec-2012
The claimant company said that the 2010 Act was outside the competence of the Scottish Parliament insofar as it severely restricted the capacity of those selling cigarettes to display them for sale. They suggested two faults. First, that the subject . .
Cited – Local Government Byelaws (Wales) Bill 2012 – Reference By The Attorney General for England and Wales SC 21-Nov-2012
Under the 1998 and 2006 Acts, the Welsh Assembly was empowered to pass legislation subject to confirmation by the English Parliament Secretary of State. The Local Government Byelaws (Wales) Bill 2012 was passed by the Assembly and purported to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Human Rights, Animals, Constitutional

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174454

Mills v HM Advocate and Another: PC 22 Jul 2002

(The High Court of Justiciary) The defendant appealed on the basis that the delay in the sentencing process had resulted in an infringement of his human rights.
Held: The appeal itself had been without merit. The delay had been to such an extent as to amount to an infringement of his human rights, but this had been compensated for in a reduction in the sentence he was to serve. There was no Human Rights case law to suggest that such a delay should lead to a setting aside of the conviction itself. He sought to rely on Darmalingum, but that should not be relied upon in this case. It was the duty of each contracting state to give effect to the Convention. In this case, the national authority had acknowledged in a sufficiently clear way its failure to meet the reasonable time requirement and had afforded redress by reducing the sentence.

Judges:

Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Mackay of Clashfern, Lord Steyn, Lord Hope of Craighead and Lord Scott of Foscote

Citations:

Times 23-Jul-2002, [2002] UKPC D2, [2004] 1 AC 441 (PC)

Links:

PC, PC, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6.1

Citing:

Cited – Dyer v Watson and Burrows PC 29-Jan-2002
Parties challenged the compliance of proceedings with the convention where there had been considerable delay.
Held: The reasonable detention provision (article 5(3)) and the reasonable time requirement (article 6(1)) conferred free-standing . .
Cited – Bunkate v The Netherlands ECHR 26-May-1993
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Case not struck out of the list; Violation of Art. 6-1; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage – claim rejected . .
Distinguished – Darmalingum v The State PC 10-Jul-2000
(Mauritius) The constitutional right of a defendant to have his case tried within a reasonable time applied not just to the initial trial but also to any appeal arising from that trial. Where there had been inordinate and inexcusable delay between . .
Distinguished – Flowers v The Queen PC 30-Oct-2000
(Jamaica) Where a defendant claimed that his constitutional right to a trial within a reasonable time had been infringed, it was correct for the appellate courts to take account of the fact that it remained clear that the defendant was guilty of a . .
Cited – Eckle v Germany ECHR 15-Jul-1982
Two fraud prosecutions against the claimants had lasted for 15 and 20 years respectively.
Held: Article 6.1 applies to all stages of criminal proceedings, including sentencing and any appeal. The ‘reasonable time’ in criminal matters, . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Ashton, Lyons and Webber CACD 6-Dec-2002
The appellants had appealed sentences for conspiracy to murder. There had been an inordinate delay between leave to appeal having been granted, and the appeal being heard.
Held: The appellants’ rights had been infringed by the delay, and they . .
Cited – Ramawat Dosoruth v The State of Mauritius The Director of Public Prosecutions PC 21-Oct-2004
PC (Mauritius) The defendant challenged his conviction for having taken a bribe saying there had been an injustice, and seeking protection directly under the constitution. The evidence against him was that a . .
Cited – McInnes v Her Majesty’s Advocate SC 10-Feb-2010
The defendant complained that the prosecution had not disclosed the fact that a prosecution witness had convictions, and that had it been disclosed it would have undermined the prosecution. Other statements taken were not disclosed as had later . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Criminal Sentencing, Scotland

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174419

P, C And S v The United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Jul 2002

The applicants challenged the way in which their newborn children had been removed by the state after birth. S had not had the opportunity of legal representation, after her lawyers had withdrawn. The removal of S’s child was challenged as disproportionate and a breach of the right to family life.
Held: Given the importance of the decision, the denial of legal representation infringed the family’s legal rights. Representation was necessary, and the refusal to allow an adjournment denied a fair trial. The procedure under which a decision was made before the birth of a child to remove it at birth, leading to a probable adoption was draconian and not justified given the alternative possibilities, and was an interference with the right to family life.

Judges:

Costa, Baka, Bratza, Jorundsson, Loucaides, Birsan and Ugrekhelidze, Early

Citations:

Times 16-Aug-2002, 56547/00, [2002] ECHR 599, (2002) 35 EHRR 1075, [2002] ECHR 604

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6.1 8

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – JD v East Berkshire Community Health NHS Trust and others HL 21-Apr-2005
Parents of children had falsely and negligently been accused of abusing their children. The children sought damages for negligence against the doctors or social workers who had made the statements supporting the actions taken. The House was asked if . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Children, Family

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174384

Carpenter v Secretary of State for the Home Department: ECJ 11 Jul 2002

The applicant had come to England on a six month visitor’s visa. She then married an English national, but her visa was not extended.
Held: The husband had business interests and activities throughout the community. The deportation of the applicant would have the effect of removing her support for him and restrict his ability to trade within the EU. The right to trade could be relied upon by an individual as against the state where necessary. A member state could only derogate from the duty where the proposed action complied also with the convention. Here the proposed action would also infringe the right to family life. The deportation would be against EU law. ‘Finally, the question of the risk of abuse should be considered, in particular the possible risk that the national rules of residence concerning the legal position of spouses of nationals who are nationals of non-member countries could be evaded by the spouse who is a national being tempted to ‘create’ a Community connection. Thus it may be argued that the nationals of a member state might, for example, take up employment – even only for a short term – in another member state precisely in order thereby to ‘bring’ themselves and the non-member country spouse within the scope of Community law. It might further be argued that the spouses who are nationals of non-member countries would thus be removed from the exclusive application of national law and would retain a legal position which might be more favourable than under national law, by thereby being given the possibility of residence based on Community law.’

Judges:

GC Rodriguez Iglesias, President and Judges N. Colneric, S. von Bahr, C. Gulmann, D. A. O. Edward, J.-P. Puissochet, M. Wathelet, R. Schintgen and J. N. Cunha Rodrigues

Citations:

[2003] 2 WLR 267, [2002] EUECJ C-60/00, C-60/00, [2003] QB 416

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

EC Treaty Art 49, European Convention on Human Rights 6.1

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Machado v Secretary of State for the Home Deptment CA 19-May-2005
At issue was a decision of the Home Secretary to deport on grounds of public policy a foreign national married to an EU national with a right of establishment in the United Kingdom. The substantive issue was whether the decision of the IAT to uphold . .
Cited – W (China) and X (China) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 9-Nov-2006
The claimants had entered England unlawfully, fleeing from China, then moved to Ireland and then back to England with their new born child, and claimed asylum. The court considered how the position of their child affected the parents.
Held: To . .
Cited – Low and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 21-Jan-2009
In each case the applicant, a company based in Ireland had employed in its restaurants, Chinese nationals who were unlawfully present here. The company sought judicial review of the arrest of its employees.
Held: ‘None of the claimants had any . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174363

Migon v Poland: ECHR 25 Jun 2002

Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 5-4; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses (domestic proceedings) – claim rejected
‘In the present case, the Court cannot speculate as to whether the applicant would have been detained if the procedural guarantees of Article 5 ss 4 of the Convention had been respected in his case. Consequently, the Court considers that the non-pecuniary damage claimed is adequately compensated by the finding of a violation of this provision.’

Citations:

24244/94, [2002] ECHR 518, [2002] ECHR 523

Links:

Worldii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 5(4)

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Greenfield, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 16-Feb-2005
The appellant had been charged with and disciplined for a prison offence. He was refused legal assistance at his hearing, and it was accepted that the proceedings involved the determination of a criminal charge within the meaning of article 6 of the . .
Cited – Faulkner, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and Another SC 1-May-2013
The applicants had each been given a life sentence, but having served the minimum term had been due to have the continued detention reviewed to establish whether or not continued detention was necessary for the protection of the pblic. It had not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174092

Pialopoulos And Others v Greece: ECHR 27 Jun 2002

Hudoc Judgment (Just satisfaction) Pecuniary damage – financial award; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award
Hudoc Judgment (Just satisfaction) Pecuniary damage – financial award; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award

Citations:

37095/97, [2002] ECHR 540

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Citing:

See Also – Pialopoulos And Others v Greece ECHR 15-Feb-2001
Hudoc Violation of P1-1; Violation of Art. 6-1; Not necessary to examine Art. 13; Just satisfaction reserved . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174089

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 prisoners infringed the human rights of such prisoners, insofar as the consideration of their release delayed the release. The lack of resources was insufficient as an excuse. Delay was part of the board’s scheme for consideration of life sentence prisoners. The hearing always took place after the end of the tariff period: cases were heard at the end of the next quarter.
Article 5(4) requires a review by the Board of whether the prisoner should continue to be detained once the tariff period has expired, and therefore requires a hearing at such a time that, whenever possible, those no longer considered dangerous can be released on or very shortly after the expiry date. ‘Article 5(1) is not relevant because the justification for the detention of a prisoner sentenced to life imprisonment (whether discretionary or automatic or mandatory) is that sentence and not the fixing of the tariff period.’ Although the required causal connection between the conviction and the deprivation of liberty might eventually come to be broken so as to give rise to a breach of Article 5(1), that would be so only very exceptionally and ‘mere delay in Article 5(4) proceedings, even after the tariff expiry date, would not . . break the causal link.’

Judges:

Lord Woolf, Lord Chief Justice, Lord Justice Simon Brown and Lord Justice Buxton

Citations:

Times 31-May-2002, Gazette 04-Jul-2002, [2002] 1 WLR 3284, [2002] EWCA Civ 770, [2002] ACD 66, [2002] 4 All ER 515, [2002] HRLR 36

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 5.1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina (on the Application of Cawser) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 5-Nov-2003
The claimant was serving a prison sentence for serious sexual offences. He would not be released until he had completed a sex offenders programme, but one was not made available, delaying his release.
Held: ‘The Secretary of State is not under . .
Distinguished – P, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 11-Dec-2003
The applicant was a discretionary life prisoner compulsorily detained in a mental hospital. His tariff had now expired. If not detained under the 1983 Act he would now be entitled to a review. He argued that there should be a joint hearing.
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Secretary of State for Justice v Walker; Same v James CA 1-Feb-2008
The claimant had been sentenced to a short period of imprisonment but with an indeterminate term until he demonstrated that it was no longer necessary for the protection of the public. He complained that the term having expired, no opportunity had . .
Cited – Faulkner, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and Another SC 1-May-2013
The applicants had each been given a life sentence, but having served the minimum term had been due to have the continued detention reviewed to establish whether or not continued detention was necessary for the protection of the pblic. It had not . .
Cited – Sturnham, Regina (on The Application of) v The Parole Board of England and Wales and Another (No 2) SC 3-Jul-2013
From 4 April 2005 until 3 December 2012, English law provided for the imposition of sentences of imprisonment for public protection (‘IPP’). The Court addressed the practical and legal issues resulting from the new system.
Held: The decision . .
Cited – Haney and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Justice SC 10-Dec-2014
The four claimants, each serving indeterminate prison sentences, said that as they approached the times when thy might apply for parol, they had been given insufficient support and training to meet the requirements for release. The courts below had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Prisons

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.172284

Davis and Another v Balfour Kilpatrick Ltd and others: CA 23 May 2002

The claimants sought damages for sickness they claimed arose from exposure to radiation when erecting radio transmitter masts. The risk had been recognised, and a safety assessment undertaken and adjustments made to the transmitter power before work began, to reduce the levels below those recommended by the NRPB. The judge did not find evidence of exposure to excess levels, but failed to make a finding as to causation. He dismissed the claim.
Held: There was no obligation on a judge to make a finding on every averment. Some common sense must be applied. There were no grounds for challenging the judge’s assessment of the evidence. Riggers on transmission masts work in an environment where they are exposed to unknown dangers, because scientific knowledge is incomplete. Human rights issues were raised because one of the operators of the mast was a public body, the BBC. Nevertheless this point had arisen only on appeal, and the judge could not be criticised for failing to develop creative points.

Judges:

Lord Justice Kennedy Lord Justice Tuckey And Mr Justice Jackson

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 736

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Marcic v Thames Water Utilities Ltd TCC 10-Jul-2001
. .
Doubted – Read v J Lyons and Co Ltd HL 1946
The plaintiff was employed by the Ministry of Defence, inspecting a weapons factory. A shell exploded injuring her. No negligence was alleged. The company worked as agent for the ministry.
Held: The respondents were not liable, since there had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health and Safety, Personal Injury, Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.172239

KB and Others, Regina (on the Applications of) v Mental Health Review Tribunal: Admn 23 Apr 2002

Damages were claimed by three mental health patients whose rights under Article 5(4) had been infringed because of inordinate delay in processing their claims to mental health review tribunals.
Held: Article 5.5 did not make an award of damages mandatory. It was complied with provided that it was possible to make an application for compensation; it did not preclude the Contracting States from making the award of compensation conditional upon proof that procedural delay had resulted in damage. Should compensation be awarded where delay has caused frustration and distress? ‘I conclude that there is no ‘clear and constant jurisprudence’ of the European Court on the recoverability of damages for distress under Article 5.5 in the absence of deprivation of liberty. There are two principles applied by the Court: that damages are not recoverable in the absence of deprivation of liberty, and that damages are recoverable for distress which may be inferred from the facts of the case. It follows that this Court must itself determine the principles it is to apply.’ Having regard for the vulnerability of detained mental health patients: ‘Thus, even in the case of mentally ill claimants, not every feeling of frustration and distress will justify an award of damages. The frustration and distress must be significant: of such intensity that it would in itself justify an award of compensation for non-pecuniary damages. In my judgment, an important touchstone of that intensity in cases such as the present will be that the hospital staff considered it to be sufficiently relevant to the mental state of the patient to warrant its mention in the clinical notes.’

Judges:

Stanley Burnton J

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 639 (Admin), [2003] EWHC 193 (Admn), [2004] 1 QB 936

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 5.4 5.5

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed to – KB v National Health Service Pensions Agency and Secretary of State for Health ECJ 7-Jan-2004
The claimant had for a number of years had a relationship with a trans-sexual. They had been unable to marry because English law would not recognise a marriage. She compained that on her death her partner would be unable to claim the pension awarded . .

Cited by:

Cited – Anufrijeva and Another v London Borough of Southwark CA 16-Oct-2003
The various claimants sought damages for established breaches of their human rights involving breaches of statutory duty by way of maladministration. Does the state have a duty to provide support so as to avoid a threat to the family life of the . .
Cited – P, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 11-Dec-2003
The applicant was a discretionary life prisoner compulsorily detained in a mental hospital. His tariff had now expired. If not detained under the 1983 Act he would now be entitled to a review. He argued that there should be a joint hearing.
Appeal from – KB v National Health Service Pensions Agency and Secretary of State for Health ECJ 7-Jan-2004
The claimant had for a number of years had a relationship with a trans-sexual. They had been unable to marry because English law would not recognise a marriage. She compained that on her death her partner would be unable to claim the pension awarded . .
Cited – Greenfield, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 16-Feb-2005
The appellant had been charged with and disciplined for a prison offence. He was refused legal assistance at his hearing, and it was accepted that the proceedings involved the determination of a criminal charge within the meaning of article 6 of the . .
Cited – Degainis, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice Admn 3-Feb-2010
The claimant sought damages. He had been released from prison and recalled, but the review of his continued detention was not undertaken as it should have been. The defendant said that the acknowledgement and apology were sufficient just . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.172200

Jego-Quere et Cie SA v Commission of the European Communities: ECFI 3 May 2002

The applicant complained that he had been individually affect by a European Instrument. The commission objected that he did not have sufficient standing to challenge the instrument.
Held: The former law that an individual had to be affected in some particular way as compared with others, is no longer correct. An individual now has standing where a measure affected him in law definitely and immediately and so as to restrict his rights. Access to justice is a fundamental right, and the former rule denied such access.

Judges:

B. Vesterdorf, President and Judges K. Lenaerts, J. Azizi, N. J. Forwood and H. Legal

Citations:

Times 31-May-2002, [2002] EUECJ T-177/01, [2002] All ER (EC) 932, [2002] ECR II-2365, [2003] 2 WLR 783, [2002] 2 CMLR 44, [2003] QB 854

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, EC Treaty 230(4)

Jurisdiction:

European

Citing:

Doubted – Plaumann v Commission EEC (Order) ECJ 31-Aug-1962
ECJ (Order) The applicant bases its application on the claim that, even if in the main action the court were to annul the refusal of the commission to grant to the federal republic of germany an import quota for . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.172285

K v the Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 31 May 2002

The applicant sought damages from the defendant who had released from custody pending deportation a man convicted of violent sexual crimes and who had then raped her. She appealed against a strike out of her claim. She had been refused information about the decision to release the offender because it was anticipated that her claim would in any event be struck out. It was later struck out because the claimant was not so clearly identifiable a victim of the offender as to anticipate a duty to her.
Held: Negligence requires more than a want of care and foreseeability of damage. Where the duty of care is imposed on one person for the acts of another, the claimant must show a close connection with the offender so as to have created an awareness of the risk in the person against whom liability is asserted. The general rule is that one man is under no duty of controlling another man to prevent his doing damage to a third. The claimant argued that the Barrett case stated that a claim alleging negligence against a pubic authority should not be struck out but should be allowed to proceed for the facts to be established at trial. A strike out of a negligence claim for lack of proximity is not a denial of the applicant’s article 6 right to a fair trial. Appeal dismissed.

Judges:

Lord Justice Simon Brown, Lord Justice Laws, And Lady Justice Arden

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 775

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Stovin v Wise, Norfolk County Council (Third Party) HL 24-Jul-1996
Statutory Duty Does Not Create Common Law Duty
The mere existence of statutory power to remedy a defect cannot of itself create a duty of care to do so. A highway authority need not have a duty of care to highway users because of its duty to maintain the highway. The two stage test ‘involves . .
Cited – Donoghue (or M’Alister) v Stevenson HL 26-May-1932
Decomposed Snail in Ginger Beer Bottle – Liability
The appellant drank from a bottle of ginger beer manufactured by the defendant. She suffered injury when she found a half decomposed snail in the liquid. The glass was opaque and the snail could not be seen. The drink had been bought for her by a . .
Cited – Dorset Yacht Co Ltd v Home Office HL 6-May-1970
A yacht was damaged by boys who had escaped from the supervision of prison officers in a nearby Borstal institution. The boat owners sued the Home Office alleging negligence by the prison officers.
Held: Any duty of a borstal officer to use . .
Cited – Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman and others HL 8-Feb-1990
Limitation of Loss from Negligent Mis-statement
The plaintiffs sought damages from accountants for negligence. They had acquired shares in a target company and, relying upon the published and audited accounts which overstated the company’s earnings, they purchased further shares.
Held: The . .
Cited – Yuen Kun-Yeu v Attorney-General of Hong Kong PC 1987
(Hong Kong) The claimant deposited money with a licensed deposit taker, regulated by the Commissioner. He lost his money when the deposit taker went into insolvent liquidation. He said the regulator was responsible when it should have known of the . .
Cited – Barrett v London Borough of Enfield HL 17-Jun-1999
The claimant had spent his childhood in foster care, and now claimed damages against a local authority for decisions made and not made during that period. The judge’s decision to strike out the claim had been upheld by the Court of Appeal.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.172268

De Keyser Limited v Wilson: EAT 20 Mar 2001

The claimant appealed against an order striking out her claim.
Held: The right to respect for private life is qualified by the right for both parties to have a just trial of the issues between them; and it has to be borne in mind that it was the claimant who invoked the right to such a trial by bringing the claim.
Lindsay J discussed the calling of expert evidence in an Employment Tribnal claim: ‘Careful thought needs to be given before any party embarks upon instructions for expert evidence. It by no means follows that because a party wishes such evidence to be admitted that it will be . . A prudent party will first explore with the employment tribunal at a directions hearing or in correspondence whether, in principle, expert evidence is likely to be acceptable.’

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Lindsay (President)

Citations:

EAT/1438/00, [2001] IRLR 324, [2001] UKEAT 1438 – 00 – 2003

Links:

Bailii, EATn

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – V Zanicchi v The Post Office EAT 26-Sep-2002
EAT Procedural Issues – Employment Tribunal
The applicant appealed dismissal of his claim on the grounds of it being vexatious. He had failed to comply with directions as to serving of statements, and had . .
Cited – Blockbuster Entertainment Ltd v James CA 25-May-2006
The defendant company appealed against an order re-instating the claimants’ claims for damages for race discrimination and victimisation after they had been struck out for wilful disobedience of the tribunal’s orders.
Held: When making a . .
Cited – Tisson v Telewest Communications Group Ltd EAT 19-Feb-2008
The claimant’s claim had been struck out for his failure to comply with an order to serve a list of documents.
Held: The appeal failed. The principles applied under the Civil Procedure Rules should be applied in Employment Tribunals. The . .
Cited – Burns v Royal Mail Group Plc (No 2) (Formerly Consignia Plc), Humphrey EAT 14-Jan-2004
The hearing was an adjourned second hearing. The appeal on sex discrimination had been dismissed, and the balance of the claim for constructive unfair dismissal was adjourned. At that adjourned hearing the claimant now sought to re-open the claims . .
Cited – Chambers-Mills v Allied Bakeries CA 21-Feb-2011
The claimant appealed against the strike out of her case for failing to comply with an order requiring her to submit to medical examination and otherwise to pursue her disability discrimination claim.
Held: The claimant’s further application . .
Cited – Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd v Bhatia EAT 27-Mar-2003
The respondent had been found to be unfairly dismissed. The appellants wished to appeal and sought disclosure of certain documents from the respondent’s solicitors. They now appealed against that refusal.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.172041

McShane v The United Kingdom: ECHR 28 May 2002

HER Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 2; No violation of Art. 6-1; No violation of Art. 14; No violation of Art. 13; Failure to comply with obligations under Article 34
The deceased died during a riot in Northern Ireland. He was under a hoarding run over by an armoured vehicle. Six years later an inquest had still not been held, civil proceedings remained pending, and an investigation by the Royal Ulster Constabulary found no basis for action.
Held: The Convention required by implication that there should be some form of effective official investigation when individuals have been killed as a result of the use of force. The failure to hold a proper inquiry into the death, was an infringement of the right to life under the Convention. The police officers investigating the incident were not independent of the officers implicated in the incident. There was however, no evidence which would entitle a conclusion that any deaths caused by the security services involved the unlawful or excessive use of force by members of the security forces, save where convictions had followed. The police had also in this case improperly put pressure on the applicant’s legal representatives with regard to evidence to be put before the court.

Judges:

M Pellonpaa, President, and Judges Sir Nicolas Bratza, A. Pastor Ridruejo, J. Makarczyk, V. Straznicka, R. Maruste and S. Pavlovschi Section Registrar M. O’Boyle

Citations:

Times 03-Jun-2002, 43290/98, [2002] ECHR 465, [2002] ECHR 469, (2002) 35 EHRR 593

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 2 34

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Gentle, Regina (on the Application of) and Another v The Prime Minister and Another HL 9-Apr-2008
The appellants were mothers of two servicemen who had died whilst on active service in Iraq. They appealed refusal to grant a public inquiry. There had already been coroners inquests. They said that Article 2 had been infringed.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Coroners

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.172160

William Faulkner v The United Kingdom: ECHR 4 Jun 2002

Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses award – Convention proceedings

Citations:

37471/97, [2002] ECHR 481

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Huma Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

See Also – William Faulkner v The United Kingdom ECHR 10-Mar-2011
A single letter had not been sent on from a prisoner to the Scottish Minister of State. A violation of article 8 was found. The interference was not ‘in accordance with the law’ nor ‘necessary in a democratic society’ for any reason permitted by . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Prisons

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.172151

Lawal v Northern Spirit Ltd: EAT 6 Oct 1999

The applicant objected that one of the lay members of the Appeal Tribunal had, on other occasions, sat with a recorder who, as counsel, was appearing for a party in that appeal.
Held: There was no real possibility of bias from this scenario. The tribunal had to be independent and impartial, but mere generalised allegations of pre-disposition to favour one party were insufficient to create any legitimate doubt as to impartiality. The assertion was that there was a risk that a lay member might be subconsciously influenced by the previous professional relationship. For something as insidious and diverse as bias, it was not reasonable to demand an authority on all fours before finding a breach of article 6, but the lay members were carefully chosen. The requirements of article 6 differed only slightly from those long required by common law.
EAT Procedural Issues – Employment Appeal Tribunal

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Lindsay (President)

Citations:

EAT/1170/98, EAT/1171/98, [1999] UKEAT 1170 – 98 – 0610

Links:

Bailii, EATn

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 1953 (1953 Cmd 8969), Industrial Tribunals (Constitution and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 1993 7(9) 11

Citing:

Application for leave – Lawal v Northern Spirit Ltd EAT 15-Feb-1999
The appellant wished to pursue an appeal against the striking out of his claim, and objected that contrary to the Rules, a member of the board who had heard the pre-hearing review had also sat on the full hearing.
Held: The appeal should be . .
See Also – Lawal v Northern Spirit Ltd EAT 15-Jan-2001
. .
Cited – Divine-Bortey v London Borough of Brent CA 14-May-1998
The claimant had brought and lost an action relating to his dismissal by the defendant, who now appealed against an order that he was not estopped from bring a second claim on a different basis namely race discrimination, disapplying the rule in . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – AA Lawal v Northern Spirit Limited CA 9-Aug-2002
The appellant had had his case considered by the Employment Appeal Tribunal. He complained that his opponent had been represented in court by an advocate who himself sat part time in the EAT, and that this would lead to undue weight and respect . .
See Also – Lawal v Northern Spirit Ltd EAT 15-Jan-2001
. .
See Also – Lawal v Northern Spirit Ltd EAT 15-Jan-2002
EAT Procedural Issues – Employment Appeal Tribunal. . .
See Also – Lawal v Northern Spirit Ltd CA 15-Jan-2002
Application for leave to appeal . .
See Also – Lawal v Northern Spirit Ltd EAT 15-Jan-2002
. .
See Also – Lawal v Northern Spirit Ltd CA 30-Oct-2002
. .
See Also – Lawal v Northern Spirit Limited HL 19-Jun-2003
Counsel appearing at the tribunal had previously sat as a judge with a tribunal member. The opposing party asserted bias in the tribunal.
Held: The test in Gough should be restated in part so that the court must first ascertain all the . .
See Also – Lawal v Northern Spirit Ltd CA 19-Feb-2004
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Human Rights, Natural Justice

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.171704

Adlard and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Fulham Stadium Ltd: CA 17 May 2002

The landowners sought permission to redevelop their football stadium. The authority were minded to grant the permission, and after an enquiry, permission was granted, but in the meantime another permission was proposed for a larger stadium. This was not called in, depriving the applicants of their opportunity to make their objections, and did not give reasons for not calling it in. The applicants sought the right to make oral representations.
Held: The objector’s argument came close to suggesting that any objector’s argument must be heard by a public enquiry. Planning decisions are ones of expediency. Where the decision depended upon argument, rather than assessment of facts, the need for oral hearings was much reduced. The general power to determine planning applications is with local authorities, and the secretary’s interventions are appropriate to achieve coherence and consistency. Appeal dismissed.

Judges:

Lord Justice Simon Brown Lord Justice Mummery And Lord Justice Dyson

Citations:

Times 31-May-2002, Gazette 27-Jun-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 671

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Town and Country Planning Act 1990 77, European Convention on Human Rights 6(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina (Holding and Barnes plc) v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and the Regions; Regina (Alconbury Developments Ltd and Others) v Same and Others HL 9-May-2001
Power to call in is administrative in nature
The powers of the Secretary of State to call in a planning application for his decision, and certain other planning powers, were essentially an administrative power, and not a judicial one, and therefore it was not a breach of the applicants’ rights . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Planning, Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.171254

Farrakhan, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 30 Apr 2002

The applicant sought admission to the UK. In the past he had made utterances which were capable of being racist. He claimed to have recanted, and had given undertakings as to his behaviour. At first instance it was held that the Home Secretary had failed to demonstrate an objective reason for refusing admission. It was a ‘reasons challenge’.
Held: The rules of Judicial review did not require the court to hold that if no reasons for a decision were given there were no reasons in fact. The Home Secretary was satisfied that Mr Farrakhan had expressed anti-Semitic and racially divisive views, and that his admission would risk public disorder. Freedom of expression is important, but article 16 created specific exceptions for aliens, and article 10 was only engaged for people already in the country, and did not affect immigration control, unless the refusal was specifically to used to control the expression of views. The Home Secretary had disclosed sufficient reasons to justify the exclusion, and the exclusion was proportionate.

Judges:

Phillips MR, Potter, Arden LJJ

Citations:

Gazette 30-May-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 606, [2002] 3 WLR 481, [2002] QB 1391

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Immigration Act 1971 1, Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 59 60(9), European Convention on Human Rights 10 16

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Poku v United Kingdom ECHR 1996
. .
Cited – Agee v United Kingdom ECHR 1976
(Commission) The Convention does not create any civil right to nationality or to a right of residence. The Secretary of State had made a deportation order against the applicant, who was a United States citizen, on grounds which included that he had . .
Cited – Piermont v France ECHR 27-Apr-1995
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) No violation of P4-2; Violation of Art. 10; Not necessary to examine Art. 14+10; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses award – . .
Appeal from – Farrakhan v Secretary of State for the Home Department QBD 1-Oct-2001
The applicant challenged the Home Secretary’s decision to exclude him from the UK, on the grounds that his presence would exacerbate tensions between the Jewish and Muslim communities. A balance is to be found between freedom of speech and the need . .

Cited by:

Cited – Huang v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 21-Mar-2007
Appellate Roles – Human Rights – Families Split
The House considered the decision making role of immigration appellate authorities when deciding appeals on Human Rights grounds, against refusal of leave to enter or remain, under section 65. In each case the asylum applicant had had his own . .
Cited – Lord Carlile of Berriew QC, and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 12-Nov-2014
The claimant had supported the grant of a visa to a woman in order to speak to members of Parliament who was de facto leader of an Iranian organsation which had in the past supported terrorism and had been proscribed in the UK, but that proscription . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Judicial Review, Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.171234

Fawdry and Co (A Firm) v Murfitt: CA 14 May 2002

The judge at first instance who was ticketed to sit as a judge in the Technology and Construction Court, had been asked to sit as a judge of the High Court to take this case. The appellant said she was acting outside her powers.
Held: The court considered the comon law doctrine of de facto officers. She was in fact not a judge of the High Court but had acted in good faith, and the parties had accepted her jurisdiction. The parties had received a fair trial before a lawfully constituted tribunal.

Judges:

Lord Justice Ward, Lord Justice Sedley And Lady Justice Hale

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 643, [2003] QB 104

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Adams v Adams 1971
Despite the lack of modern English authority applying the doctrine, it was still part of the English common law, that the acts of a de facto officer were validated. The de facto officer must have some basis for his assumption of office, variously . .
Cited – Pfeifer And Plankl v Austria ECHR 25-Feb-1992
Two of the judges who had acted in Mr Pfeifer’s case also presided at his trial, despite a clear provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure disqualifying them. The Commission dealt with whether the court was ‘established by law’ separately from . .
Cited – Curtin v Barton 1893
(New York) ‘When a court with competent jurisdiction is duly established, a suitor who resorts to it for the administration of justice and the protection of private rights should not be defeated or embarrassed by questions relating to the title of . .

Cited by:

Cited – Coppard v The Commissioners of Customs and Excise, Lord Chancellor intervening CA 9-Apr-2003
The judge, a circuit judge who had been appointed a judge of the TCC, had adjudicated on the claimant’s case in the High Court in the false belief that the appointment allowed him to do so.
Held: The judge had not wilfully closed his eyes to . .
Cited – Baldock v Webster and Others CA 21-Dec-2004
The claimant alleged negligence against his solicitors in having failed to challenge an order made ultra vires by a county court judge.
Held: The common law doctrine of de facto jurisdiction validated the decision of the judge. The recorder . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.171248

Matthews v Ministry of Defence: CA 29 May 2002

The Ministry appealed against a finding that the Act, which deprived the right of a Crown employee to sue for personal injuries, was an infringement of his human rights.
Held: The restriction imposed by the section was not a procedural section, but a substantive one which delimited the rights and liabilities arising under civil law. Accordingly, human right slaw did not apply. The Commission on human rights was wrong to suggest that such rights might be affected.

Judges:

Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, Master of the Rolls, Lord Justice Mummery and Lady Justice Hale

Citations:

[2002] 1 WLR 2621, Times 31-May-2002, Gazette 04-Jul-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 773

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Crown Proceedings Act 1947 10, European Convention on Human Rights 6.1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Pinder v United Kingdom ECHR 1984
(Commission) ‘The Commission . . recalls that the concept of ‘civil rights’ is autonomous. Thus, irrespective of whether a right is in domestic law labelled ‘public’, ‘private’, ‘civil’ or something else, it is ultimately for the Convention organs . .
Cited – Dyer v United Kingdom ECHR 1985
. .
Appealed to – Matthews v Ministry of Defence HL 13-Feb-2003
The claimant sought damages against the Crown, having suffered asbestosis whilst in the armed forces. He challenged the denial to him of a right of action by the 1947 Act.
Held: Human rights law did not create civil rights, but rather voided . .
Appeal from – Matthews v The Ministry of Defence QBD 22-Jan-2002
The claimant sought damages for asbestos related diseases, incurred whilst working as an engineer in the Royal Navy. He claimed that the bar on claiming against the Crown infringed his rights to a remedy. The 1987 Act removed the bar to a claim, but . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Matthews v Ministry of Defence HL 13-Feb-2003
The claimant sought damages against the Crown, having suffered asbestosis whilst in the armed forces. He challenged the denial to him of a right of action by the 1947 Act.
Held: Human rights law did not create civil rights, but rather voided . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Armed Forces, Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.171334

Anufrijeva v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 22 Mar 2002

Three asylum-seekers brought claims of breach of their Article 8 rights. One complained of a local authority’s failure to provide accommodation to meet special needs, the other two of maladministration and delay in the handling of their asylum applications.
Held: All three claims failed. The essential object of article 8 is to protect individuals against arbitrary interference by public authorities, but it may also give rise to positive obligations.
Lord Woolf CJ said: ‘The remedy of damages generally plays a less prominent role in actions based on breaches of the articles of the Convention, than in actions based on breaches of private law obligations where, more often than not, the only remedy claimed is damages. Where an infringement of an individual’s human rights has occurred, the concern will usually be to bring the infringement to an end and any question of compensation will be of secondary, if any, importance.’ and ‘We find it hard to conceive . . of a situation in which the predicament of an individual will be such that article 8 requires him to be provided with welfare support, where his predicament is not sufficiently severe to engage article 3. Article 8 may more readily be engaged where a family unit is involved. Where the welfare of children is at stake, article 8 may require the provision of welfare support in a manner which enables family life to continue.’

Judges:

Lord Woolf CJ, Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers MR and Auld LJ

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 399, [2004] QB 1124

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Regina (on the Application of Anufrijeva) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another Admn 25-Oct-2001
. .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Anufrijeva HL 26-Jun-2003
The appellant challenged the withdrawal of her benefits payments. She had applied for asylum, and been granted reduced rate income support. A decision was made refusing her claim, but that decision was, by policy, not communicated to her for several . .
Cited – Regina (Amicus etc) v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry Admn 26-Apr-2004
The claimants sought a declaration that part of the Regulations were invalid, and an infringement of their human rights. The Regulations sought to exempt church schools from an obligation not to discriminate against homosexual teachers.
Held: . .
Cited – Andrews v Reading Borough Council QBD 29-Apr-2004
The claimant sought damages for increased road noise resulting from traffic control measures taken by the respondent.
Held: The defendants action to strike out the claim could not succeed. They had not shown that the claim was unarguable, . .
Cited – Greenfield, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 16-Feb-2005
The appellant had been charged with and disciplined for a prison offence. He was refused legal assistance at his hearing, and it was accepted that the proceedings involved the determination of a criminal charge within the meaning of article 6 of the . .
Cited – Dobson and others v Thames Water Utilities Ltd and Another CA 29-Jan-2009
The claimants complained of odours and mosquitoes affecting their properties from the activities of the defendants in the conduct of their adjoining Sewage Treatment plant. The issue was as to the rights of non title holders to damages in nuisance . .
Cited – McDonald, Regina (on The Application of) v Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea SC 6-Jul-2011
The claimant, a former prima ballerina, had suffered injury as she grew old. She came to suffer a condition requiring her to urinate at several points during each night. The respondent had been providing a carer to stay with her each night to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Benefits, Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.170088

Rusbridger and Another v Attorney General: CA 20 Mar 2002

The paper wanted to publish an article about the monarchy but was concerened that it might lead to it being prosecuted under the 1848 Act. The complainant sought declarations as to the incompatibility of the 1848 Act with the 1998 Act.
Held: The defendant had made no decision (other than not to prosecute) and there was no decision to challenge. Whilst the other applications should not proceed, the court considered that the possible incompatibility of the 1848 Act with the Human Rights Act was a proper matter of public interest and might be pursued.

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 397

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Treason and Felony Act 1848 3, Human Rights Act 1998

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed to – Regina v Her Majesty’s Attorney General ex parte Rusbridger and Another HL 26-Jun-2003
Limit to Declaratory Refilef as to Future Acts
The applicant newspaper editor wanted to campaign for a republican government. Articles were published, and he sought confirmation that he would not be prosecuted under the Act, in the light of the 1998 Act.
Held: Declaratory relief as to the . .
Cited – Regina v Mitchel 1848
The judge instructed the jury that advocacy of republicanism was necessarily an offence: ‘There are no two things more inconsistent with each other – no two ideas more opposed to each other – no two expressions more contradictory of each other than . .
Cited – Rex v Charles Gavan Duffy 1848
The defendant was editor of the Irish newspaper ‘The Nation’. He was accused of treason.
Held: The judge summed up the offence of treason under the Act as follows: ‘if any person shall entertain the intention of deposing Her Majesty from her . .
Cited – Regina v A (Complainant’s Sexual History) (No 2) HL 17-May-2001
The fact of previous consensual sex between complainant and defendant could be relevant in a trial of rape, and a refusal to allow such evidence could amount to a denial of a fair trial to a defendant. Accordingly, where the evidence was so relevant . .
Cited – Imperial Tobacco Ltd v Attorney-General HL 1980
The applicant sought a declaration as to the lawfulness of a lottery scheme whilst criminal proceedings were pending against it for the same scheme.
Held: It was not necessary to decide whether a declaration as to the criminality or otherwise . .
Cited – Regina (Pretty) v Director of Public Prosecutions, and Another, Medical Ethics Alliance and Others, interveners Admn 18-Oct-2001
The function of the Director’s office is statutory, and his powers are those laid down. He is not able to excuse possible criminal conduct in advance, and nor could he establish a policy of not applying certain statutory provisions. The Suicide Act . .
Cited – Attorney-General v Able and Others QBD 28-Apr-1983
The Attorney General sought a declaration as to whether it would be the crime of aiding and abetting or counselling and procuring suicide, to distribute a booklet published by the respondent which described various effective ways of committing . .
Cited – Joyce v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 1948
The defendant was an American citizen but held a British passport. After the outbreak of war between Great Britain and Germany in 1939, he delivered from German territory broadcast talks in English hostile to Great Britain.
Held: His . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina v Her Majesty’s Attorney General ex parte Rusbridger and Another HL 26-Jun-2003
Limit to Declaratory Refilef as to Future Acts
The applicant newspaper editor wanted to campaign for a republican government. Articles were published, and he sought confirmation that he would not be prosecuted under the Act, in the light of the 1998 Act.
Held: Declaratory relief as to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Constitutional, Human Rights, Media

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.170080

Regina (Amin) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Regina (Middleton) v Coroner for West Somersetshire: CA 27 Mar 2002

A prisoner had been killed in his cell by a cell-mate known to be unstable and racist. His family sought to be involved in the inquiry into the death within the prison system. A second prisoner hanged himself in his cell. His family alleged that he should have been kept on suicide watch. The coroner had not left the issue of neglect to the jury, but the jury had passed a note to him to say they wished to find neglect by the Prison Service. The family asked the coroner to append the note to his verdict. He refused. In each case the family challenged the decision, and the Home Secretary now appealed the resulting decisions.
Held: Though no explicit duty to investigate a death existed, under Human Rights law such a duty had developed. The court had to consider how such a duty applied in individual cases. The Jordan requirements were not set in stone. The enquiry into the one death had been adequate. As to the coroner’s verdict, there was no existing power to make a free standing verdict of neglect. Did that infringe the family’s rights? It was more important to identify defects in the system than to make findings of individual neglect. The Coroners Rules must be read so as to fit Human Rights law, and rule 42 should be read so as only to prevent findings of individual neglect. Coroners’ proceedings should not become adversarial. The state may have an adjectival duty under ECHR Article 2 in a case which did not involve an allegation of an intentional killing.

Judges:

Lord Woolf, Lord Chief Justice, Lord Justice Laws and Lord Justice Dyson

Citations:

Times 18-Apr-2002, Gazette 10-May-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 390, [2003] QB 581

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Coroners Rules 1984 (1984 No 552) 42, European Convention on Human Rights 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Edwards v The United Kingdom ECHR 14-Mar-2002
The deceased, a young man of mixed race, had been placed in a cell with another prisoner who was known to be violent, racist, and mentally unstable. The staff knew that the panic button was defective. The deceased was murdered by his cell-mate. His . .
Cited – Stephen Jordan v The United Kingdom (1) ECHR 14-Mar-2000
A commanding officer had decided that a soldier should be held in custody pending trial. The soldier complained that since the same commanding officer would later be involved in the preparation of the case against him, that decision was tainted and . .
Cited – Regina v North Humberside and Scunthorpe Coroner ex parte Jamieson CA 27-Apr-1994
The deceased prisoner had hanged himself. He had been a known suicide risk, and his brother said that the authorities being so aware, the death resulted from their lack of care. The inquest heard in full the circumstannces leading up to the death, . .
Appealed to – Amin, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 16-Oct-2003
Prisoner’s death – need for full public enquiry
The deceased had been a young Asian prisoner. He was placed in a cell overnight with a prisoner known to be racist, extremely violent and mentally unstable. He was killed. The family sought an inquiry into the death.
Held: There had been a . .
Appeal from – Middleton, Regina (on the Application of) v Coroner for the Western District of Somerset Admn 14-Dec-2001
The deceased had committed suicide whilst in prison. It was argued that the prison should have recognised that he was a suicide risk, and acted accordingly. The coroner had requested a note from the jury as to the cause of death. The court . .
Appealed to – Middleton, Regina (on the Application of) v Coroner for the Western District of Somerset HL 11-Mar-2004
The deceased had committed suicide in prison. His family felt that the risk should have been known to the prison authorities, and that they had failed to guard against that risk. The coroner had requested an explanatory note from the jury.

Cited by:

Cited – Khan, Regina (on the Application of) v HM Coroner for West Hertfordshire and Another Admn 7-Mar-2002
The deceased died in police custody. The coroner refused to leave to the jury possible verdicts of unlawful killing, or death contributed to by neglect, or breach of his right to life. He adjourned the hearing to allow this challenge.
Held: . .
Cited – Khan, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Health CA 10-Oct-2003
The claimant’s child had died as a result of negligence in hospital. The parents had been told the result of police investigation and decision not to prosecute, and the hospital’s own investigation, but had not been sufficiently involved. There . .
Appeal from – Amin, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 16-Oct-2003
Prisoner’s death – need for full public enquiry
The deceased had been a young Asian prisoner. He was placed in a cell overnight with a prisoner known to be racist, extremely violent and mentally unstable. He was killed. The family sought an inquiry into the death.
Held: There had been a . .
Appeal from – Middleton, Regina (on the Application of) v Coroner for the Western District of Somerset HL 11-Mar-2004
The deceased had committed suicide in prison. His family felt that the risk should have been known to the prison authorities, and that they had failed to guard against that risk. The coroner had requested an explanatory note from the jury.
Appeal from – Middleton, Regina (on the Application of) v Coroner for the Western District of Somerset HL 11-Mar-2004
The deceased had committed suicide in prison. His family felt that the risk should have been known to the prison authorities, and that they had failed to guard against that risk. The coroner had requested an explanatory note from the jury.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Coroners, Prisons, Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.170038

County Properties Limited v The Scottish Ministers: OHCS 25 Jul 2000

The company applied for planning permission. The Secretary of State called in the application to be decided by a reporter. The applicant complained that this infringed its right to a hearing before an impartial tribunal. Such a person might deal with issues of fact, but here he would also be making the decision, and the objection was lodged by an agency for which the Secretary was responsible. The Secretary was judge in his own cause.

Judges:

Lord Macfadyen

Citations:

Times 19-Sep-2000, [2000] ScotCS 212, 2000 SLT 965

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

Appealed to – County Properties Limited v The Scottish Ministers for Judicial Review IHCS 16-Aug-2001
. .

Cited by:

Appeal from – County Properties Limited v The Scottish Ministers for Judicial Review IHCS 16-Aug-2001
. .
Cited – Regina (Holding and Barnes plc) v Secretary of State for Environment Transport and the Regions; Regina (Alconbury Developments Ltd and Others) v Same and Others HL 9-May-2001
Power to call in is administrative in nature
The powers of the Secretary of State to call in a planning application for his decision, and certain other planning powers, were essentially an administrative power, and not a judicial one, and therefore it was not a breach of the applicants’ rights . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Planning

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.169250

County Properties Limited v The Scottish Ministers for Judicial Review: IHCS 16 Aug 2001

Judges:

Lord Prosser and Lord Kirkwood and Lord Mackay of Drumadoon

Citations:

[2001] ScotCS 206, [2001] ScotHC 87

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Protection of Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

Appeal from – County Properties Limited v The Scottish Ministers OHCS 25-Jul-2000
The company applied for planning permission. The Secretary of State called in the application to be decided by a reporter. The applicant complained that this infringed its right to a hearing before an impartial tribunal. Such a person might deal . .

Cited by:

Appealed to – County Properties Limited v The Scottish Ministers OHCS 25-Jul-2000
The company applied for planning permission. The Secretary of State called in the application to be decided by a reporter. The applicant complained that this infringed its right to a hearing before an impartial tribunal. Such a person might deal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Planning

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.168934

Khan, Regina (on the Application of) v HM Coroner for West Hertfordshire and Another: Admn 7 Mar 2002

The deceased died in police custody. The coroner refused to leave to the jury possible verdicts of unlawful killing, or death contributed to by neglect, or breach of his right to life. He adjourned the hearing to allow this challenge.
Held: Coroners should be cautious of such adjournments. The jury would now deliver any verdict after a four month delay. The deceased had been involved in a struggle in the station, and lost consciousness, but had not been put in the recovery position for some time. Neglect in coroners’ cases meant failing to take an opportunity to avoid a death. However there was no evidence to support any conclusion that a relationship of causation existed to support a verdict of neglect.

Judges:

Mr Justice Richards

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 302 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Inner London South District Coroner Ex Parte Douglas-Williams CA 30-Jul-1998
A coroner had the right not to leave all possible verdicts to a jury, even including one possibly supported by the evidence, where the overwhelming evidence pointed one way, and possible confusion of jury might be caused by leaving all verdicts to . .
Cited – Regina v Galbraith CCA 1981
Rejection of Submission of No Case to Answer
The defendant had faced a charge of affray. The court having rejected his submission of having no case to answer, he had made an exculpatory statement from the dock. He appealed against his conviction.
Held: Lord Lane LCJ said: ‘How then . .
Cited – Regina v North Humberside and Scunthorpe Coroner ex parte Jamieson CA 27-Apr-1994
The deceased prisoner had hanged himself. He had been a known suicide risk, and his brother said that the authorities being so aware, the death resulted from their lack of care. The inquest heard in full the circumstannces leading up to the death, . .
Cited – Regina (Amin) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Regina (Middleton) v Coroner for West Somersetshire CA 27-Mar-2002
A prisoner had been killed in his cell by a cell-mate known to be unstable and racist. His family sought to be involved in the inquiry into the death within the prison system. A second prisoner hanged himself in his cell. His family alleged that he . .
Cited – Regina (on the Application of Jean Marshall) v Her Majesty’s Coroner for Coventry Admn 22-Oct-2001
The applicant sought judicial review of the verdict of the coroner’s jury that a death had been accidental. The deceased, a schizophrenic died of an overdose of crack cocaine, whilst in police custody. His family sought a verdict of accidental death . .
Cited – Nicholls v Coroner for City of Liverpool Admn 8-Nov-2001
As the deceased was arrested he swallowed something. He was examined by a doctor and denied that he had swallowed drugs, but his condition deteriorated and he died at hospital. The coroner refused to admit the evidence of a professor who was highly . .
Cited – Regina (Dawson) v HM Coroner for East Riding and Kingston upon Hull Admn 2001
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Coroners, Human Rights

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.168731

Hooper and others v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions: Admn 14 Feb 2002

The claimants alleged that the way they were treated as widowers under the benefits subjected them to discrimination.
Held: The continued payment of widow’s pension was objectively justified.

Judges:

Moses J

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 191 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina (on the application of Smith) v Barking and Dagenham London Borough Council and another Admn 19-Nov-2002
The applicants sought to argue that the attempt to evict him from the caravan site he occupied infringed his article 8 and 14 rights. Though the Isaacs case had decided there was good reason to deny security, he argued that was no longer applicable, . .
Appeal from – Hooper and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions CA 18-Jun-2003
The appellants were widowers whose wives had died at a time when the benefits a widow would have received were denied to widowers. The legislation had since changed but they variously sought compensation for the unpaid sums.
Held: The appeal . .
At first instance – Hooper and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions HL 5-May-2005
Widowers claimed that, in denying them benefits which would have been payable to widows, the Secretary of State had acted incompatibly with their rights under article 14 read with article 1 of Protocol 1 and article 8 of the ECHR.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Discrimination, Benefits, Human Rights

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.168033

Regina (Persey and Others) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: Admn 15 Mar 2002

The applicants sought an order that the government enquiries into the foot and mouth outbreak should be held in public. They argued that the need to re-establish public faith made a decision not to hold the enquiries in public irrational, and that a failure to hold the enquiry in public infringed the applicant’s human rights.
Held: The distinction between freedom of expression, and of access to information was central. Art 10 created no obligation to provide a public forum for discussion of issues. On the question of whether there is a presumption that an inquiry would be held in public (Wagstaff), this must be approached on a case by case basis with no presumption either way.

Judges:

Lord Justice Simon Brown and Mr Justice Scott Baker

Citations:

Times 28-Mar-2002, Gazette 23-May-2002, [2002] EWHC 371 (Admin), [2003] QB 794, [2002] 3 WLR 704

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 10

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for Health, Ex Parte Wagstaff etc QBD 31-Aug-2000
The Secretary of State announced a public enquiry into the Shipman case. He did not say whether it would be a public enquiry. The bereaved families and media wanted it to be public, and contended that it had been invalidly constituted, that an . .

Cited by:

Cited – Kennedy v The Charity Commission SC 26-Mar-2014
The claimant journalist sought disclosure of papers acquired by the respondent in its conduct of enquiries into the charitable Mariam appeal. The Commission referred to an absolute exemption under section 32(2) of the 2000 Act, saying that the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Administrative, Agriculture, Information, Judicial Review, Media

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.168069

Wilkinson v Commissioners of Inland Revenue: Admn 14 Feb 2002

The case concerned the differential tax treatment between men and women, which granted to widows a tax allowance that was not granted to widowers.
Held: The court made a ‘declaration of incompatibility’ pursuant to section 4. 1(1) of the TMA gives to the Commissioners a wide statutory power to grant concessions to taxpayers which derogate from their obligations to pay tax in accordance with the letter of the applicable tax legislation

Judges:

Moses J

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 182 (Admin), [2002] STC 347

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Human Rights Act 1998 4, Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 262, Taxes Management Act 1970 1(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina on the Application of Wilkinson v The Commissioners of Inland Revenue CA 18-Jun-2003
The claimant had not received the same tax allowance following his wife’s death as would have been received by a woman surviving her husband. That law had been declared incompatible with Human Rtights law as discriminatory, but the respondent . .
Cited – Hooper and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions HL 5-May-2005
Widowers claimed that, in denying them benefits which would have been payable to widows, the Secretary of State had acted incompatibly with their rights under article 14 read with article 1 of Protocol 1 and article 8 of the ECHR.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Taxes Management, Discrimination, Human Rights

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.168032

Spinnato, Re v Governor of HM Prison Brixton and Another: Admn 20 Dec 2001

The prisoner had been convicted in his absence in 1991 of offences in Italy. He was resident in England at the time, and many years later extradition was sought. He had not hidden his whereabouts, and the Italian State seemed not to have pursued him. He now said it would not be in the interests of justice for him to be called upon to serve the sentence, and that the trial in his absence infringed his human rights.
Held: A trial in a defendants absence is not automatically unfair, particularly if he had opportunity to be heard. In this case he had been actively represented in his absence, and in England his trial would not be set aside. Would it be unjust or oppressive to order his return? Although the delay had been substantial, and he had acquired new obligations here, it was not wrong to order his return to serve the sentence.

Judges:

Lord Justice Kennedy And Mrs Justice Hallett

Citations:

[2001] EWHC Admin 1124

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights, Extradition Act 1989 6(2) 11(3)(b)

Citing:

Cited – Colloza and Rubinat v Italy ECHR 1985
. .
Cited – Regina v John Victor Hayward, Anthony William Jones, Paul Nigel Purvis CACD 31-Jan-2001
A defendant can forego his right to attend his trial, but he still had the general right to be present, and to have legal representation at the trial. The court’s discretion to proceed in his absence should only be exercised with great care. A trial . .

Cited by:

Cited – Mariotti v Government of Italy and others Admn 2-Dec-2005
The extraditee had been convicted in his absence in Italy having fled to avoid the trial. He complained that the trial process had been unfair and the evidence against him weak.
Held: The court’s duty was not to investigate the evidential . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Immigration, Human Rights

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.168014

Curzon Berkeley Ltd, Regina (on Application of) v Bliss (Valuation Officer, London Westminster Group Inland Revenue): Admn 19 Dec 2001

The appellant sought to challenge rating entries in the non-domestic rating list, by way of judicial review. The application was out of time, but proceeded as a substantial review. The applicant said the entries were incurably defective in that they misdescribed the properties. Domestic properties could be in the list if used for short stay lets.
Held: The misdescription did not annul the entry, and was capable of rectification if necessary. However the Act was incapable of being reread so as to impose liability for tax on a freeholder. The Act may include a drafting error, but it could not be rewritten by the courts to correct that error.

Judges:

Mr James Goudie QC

Citations:

[2001] EWHC Admin 1130

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Local Government Finance Act 1992 22 28, Local Government Finance Act 1988 41, Non-Domestic Rates (Alteration of Lists and Appeals) Regulations 1993

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Northamptonshire LVC, ex parte Anglian Water Authority 1990
. .
Cited – Westminster City Council v Woodbury (Valuation Officer) and the Yard Arm Club Ltd CA 1-Nov-1992
A vessel, the Hispaniola was firmly fixed to moorings. The Council appealed a finding that it was exempt from inclusion in the rating list by the Act.
Held: The court found difficulty in the idea of lateral occupation by a chattel, or that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating, Human Rights

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.168011

Regina v Hughes: PC 11 Mar 2002

(Saint Lucia) Having been convicted of murder, the defendant was made subject to the mandatory death penalty applied under St Lucia law. He appealed successfully on the basis that the constitution of St Lucia protected him from inhuman or degrading punishment or treatment under article 5, and the Crown appealed to the Privy Council.
Held: The mandatory death penalty is indeed to be regarded as inhuman or degrading punishment or treatment. The committee which exercised the prerogative of mercy was not an independent tribunal sufficient to save the procedure. The Crown’s appeal was dismissed, and the case remitted for re-sentence.

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill Lord Hutton Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough Lord Millett Lord Rodger of Earlsferry

Citations:

[2002] UKPC 12, [2002] 2 AC 259

Links:

PC, Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Code of Saint Lucia 1992 172, Saint Lucia Constitution Order 1978 (SI 1978 No 1901) 5

Jurisdiction:

Commonwealth

Citing:

Applied – Reyes v The Queen PC 11-Mar-2002
(Belize) The Criminal Code of Belize provided that any murder by shooting was to be treated as Class A Murder, and be subject to the mandatory death penalty. The applicant having been convicted, appealed saying this was inhuman or degrading . .
Cited – Berthill Fox v Regina (No 2) PC 11-Mar-2002
(Saint Christopher and Nevis) The appellant had been convicted of murder, for which the penalty was death. He claimed that the sentence was an infringement of his constitutional and human rights. The constitution declared that it prevailed over all . .

Cited by:

Cited – Berthill Fox v Regina (No 2) PC 11-Mar-2002
(Saint Christopher and Nevis) The appellant had been convicted of murder, for which the penalty was death. He claimed that the sentence was an infringement of his constitutional and human rights. The constitution declared that it prevailed over all . .
Cited – Pilar Aida Rojas v Brian Berllaque PC 10-Nov-2003
PC (Gibraltar) The system of selecting a criminal jury obliged men to be available for selection, but women could choose not to be on the role of jurors. The result was that jury lists and juries were almost . .
Cited – Watson v Regina PC 7-Jul-2004
(Jamaica) The defendant was convicted of two murders from the same incident. The Act provided for the death penalty if he was convicted of a second murder. He appealed the death sentence in the circumstances, and said also that it was . .
Cited – Bally Sheng Balson v The State PC 2-Feb-2005
PC (Dominica) The appellant had been convicted of the murder of his partner and appealed the conviction.
Held: The case did not fall within the case of Anderson, and counsel’s failure was not such as to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Constitutional, Criminal Sentencing, Human Rights, Commonwealth

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167754

Berthill Fox v Regina (No 2): PC 11 Mar 2002

(Saint Christopher and Nevis) The appellant had been convicted of murder, for which the penalty was death. He claimed that the sentence was an infringement of his constitutional and human rights. The constitution declared that it prevailed over all other laws, and guaranteed certain fundamental rights and freedoms. Though it allowed for the possibility of the death sentence for murder, he claimed the sentence was inhuman or degrading punishment or treatment.
Held: The council had already twice held that similar constitutions did not allow for a death penalty which was mandatory. The appeal was allowed, and the case remitted for re-sentencing.

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill Lord Hutton Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough Lord Millett Lord Rodger of Earlsferry

Citations:

[2002] 2 AC 284, [2002] UKPC 13

Links:

PC, Berthill Fox v. The Qu’ target=’_n’>PC, Bailii, PC

Statutes:

Saint Christopher and Nevis Constitution Order 1983 (SI 1983 No 881)

Jurisdiction:

Commonwealth

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Hughes PC 11-Mar-2002
(Saint Lucia) Having been convicted of murder, the defendant was made subject to the mandatory death penalty applied under St Lucia law. He appealed successfully on the basis that the constitution of St Lucia protected him from inhuman or degrading . .
Cited – Reyes v The Queen PC 11-Mar-2002
(Belize) The Criminal Code of Belize provided that any murder by shooting was to be treated as Class A Murder, and be subject to the mandatory death penalty. The applicant having been convicted, appealed saying this was inhuman or degrading . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina v Hughes PC 11-Mar-2002
(Saint Lucia) Having been convicted of murder, the defendant was made subject to the mandatory death penalty applied under St Lucia law. He appealed successfully on the basis that the constitution of St Lucia protected him from inhuman or degrading . .
Cited – Pilar Aida Rojas v Brian Berllaque PC 10-Nov-2003
PC (Gibraltar) The system of selecting a criminal jury obliged men to be available for selection, but women could choose not to be on the role of jurors. The result was that jury lists and juries were almost . .
Cited – Watson v Regina PC 7-Jul-2004
(Jamaica) The defendant was convicted of two murders from the same incident. The Act provided for the death penalty if he was convicted of a second murder. He appealed the death sentence in the circumstances, and said also that it was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Sentencing, Human Rights, Constitutional

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167755

Regina (Ponting) v Governor of HMP Whitemoor, Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 22 Feb 2002

The applicant appealed a refusal of permission to use a computer for preparation of materials for his litigation save under conditions imposed by the Prisons Service. He was dyslexic, and with a low IQ. He claimed that the conditions operated so as effectively to restrict his access to justice, and to interfere with his right for privacy for his correspondence.
Held: A balance was to be found with good order and discipline, and security, and the prisoner’s rights. Circumstances might exist where restrictions on the use of a computer would interfere with both rights, but in this case they did not save only the restriction on their use to overnight hours..

Judges:

Lord Justice Schiemann, Lord Justice Clarke, Lady Justice Arden

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 215 (Admin )

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina (Daly) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 23-May-2001
A prison policy requiring prisoners not to be present when their property was searched and their mail was examined was unlawful. The policy had been introduced after failures in search procedures where officers had been intimidated by the presence . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Prisons, Human Rights

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167662

H (A Healthcare Worker) v Associated Newspapers Limited: CA 27 Feb 2002

The applicant had been a health care worker, but was no longer working. He had come to be HIV positive, and an order was sought protecting his identity from disclosure in the press. He had evidence that the NHS guidelines on notification of patients of having been treated. He declined to provide details of his private patients for notification. He had obtained an order under the rules to protect his identity within the proceedings.
Held: The order against the newspaper would better have been obtained as part of the first action, but the two could be consolidated. The order had allowed the authority to be named, but restricted the newspaper publishing anything which might lead directly or indirectly to his identification. Both parties challenged parts of the order. The order preventing the naming of the Health Authority was intended only to protect the identity of the worker, and was properly made. There was a balancing exercise to be had, and also there was a need to respect the privacy of those who had been treated by H. The Health authority also had interests which it had a duty to protect. The court had power to protect its identity to avoid a situation which would seriously interfere with its statutory duties. The consequence of identifying the authority would include also the inevitable discovery of the identity of H. N should not be identified. H must hand over such records of his private patients as was necessary to allow a look-back exercise, and identify any who might have been at risk.

Judges:

Lord Phillips MR, Lord Justice Judge, Lord Justice Carnwath

Citations:

Times 19-Mar-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 195

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Data Protection Act 1988, Civil Procedure Rules 39.2.(2), Human Rights Act 1998 Sch1 Art 10

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – A Health Authority v Dr X and Others CA 21-Dec-2001
Where, after a children case has been heard, a party wishes to apply for the release of papers, the application should be made before the judge who had heard the case. To do otherwise left the second judge making a difficult assessment with . .
Cited – Broadmoor Hospital Authority and Another v Robinson CA 20-Dec-1999
Where a body was given statutory duties, it would normally be entitled to orders restraining others from interfering with its performance of those duties. A patient detained under the Act had written a book, and the Hospital had sought to restrain . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Information, Human Rights, Media, Civil Procedure Rules, Contempt of Court

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167703

Regina (on the Application of Mullen) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department: QBD 21 Feb 2002

The applicant had been convicted in 1990 of conspiracy to cause explosions. He had been arrested by means of an unlawful eviction from Zimbabwe, and his appeal had been successful after ten years in prison. He now appealed against a refusal to award him compensation for his imprisonment, and said that the provision of ex gratia payments only infringed his human rights.
Held: The Appeal had succeeded not for any doubt about the accuracy of the finding, but rather as to the propriety of the conviction, but certainty of guilt cannot displace the essence abuse of process, namely the degradation of the lawful administration of justice. That the appeal succeeded was an exercise of discretion, not a revelation of a miscarriage of justice. The Home Secretary was not an independent tribunal for making such a decision. However the Secretary merely applied the findings of the court, and did not himself have discretion. There had been no legitimate expectation created, and nor was there any inconsistency between the allowing of the appeal, and the refusal of compensation. Appeal dismissed.

Judges:

Lord Justice Simon Brown, Mr Justice Scott Baker

Citations:

Times 27-Feb-2002, Gazette 28-Mar-2002, 2002] EWHC 230 (Admin), [2002] 1 WLR 1857

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1988 133, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 14(6), European Convention on Human Rights Seventh Protocol Art 3

Citing:

Appealed to – Regina (on the Application of Mullen) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 20-Dec-2002
The applicant had been unlawfully taken from Zimbabwe, then tried and sentenced in the UK. His conviction was set aside as unsafe, but he had been refused damages. He appealed.
Held: There was no substantial criticism of the trial itself, but . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Regina (on the Application of Mullen) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 20-Dec-2002
The applicant had been unlawfully taken from Zimbabwe, then tried and sentenced in the UK. His conviction was set aside as unsafe, but he had been refused damages. He appealed.
Held: There was no substantial criticism of the trial itself, but . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative, Damages, Human Rights

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167664

London Borough of Tower Hamlets v Runa Begum: CA 6 Mar 2002

The applicant had applied for rehousing as a homeless person. She was offered interim accommodation but refused it. Her case was reviewed, and her reasons rejected. She claimed the procedure was unfair, in that the authority was looking at decisions on disputed facts, and reviewing its own decisions on those facts. It was not acting independently.
Held: The review was a determination of the applicants civil rights, and not merely the exercise of a discretion. Though there may have been no actual bias in the decision, it was done in private, and there was an appearance of risk of bias. The s204 right of appeal to the county court was part of the same procedure, and was independent. That court had full power to look at those matters at issue, and was a sufficient remedy to any defects in the earlier procedure.

Judges:

The Lord Chief Justice Of England And Wales, Lord Justice Laws, Lord Justice Dyson

Citations:

Times 04-Apr-2002, Gazette 18-Apr-2002, [2002] HLR 70, [2002] EWCA Civ 239

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights Art 6.1, Housing Act 1996 204(1), Allocation of Housing and Homelessness (Review Procedures) Regulations 1999, Local Authority (Contracting Out of Allocation Housing Homelessness Functions) Order 1996 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Deputy Governor of Parkhurst Prison, Ex parte Hague, Weldon v Home Office HL 24-Jul-1991
The prisoner challenged the decision to place him in segregation under Prison Rule 43. Under rule 43(1) the initial power to segregate was given to ‘the governor’. The case arose from the fact that the governor of one prison had purported to . .
Distinguished – London Borough of Newham v Adan CA 14-Dec-2001
The applicant was a Dutch national. She appealed for housing as a homeless person. The local authority, after review found her not to have a settled intention to stay in England. She appealed, to the County Court, and succeeded, and the Authority . .

Cited by:

Cited – The Secretary of State for Health, Dorset County Council v The Personal Representative of Christopher Beeson CA 18-Dec-2002
The deceased had been adjudged by his local authority to have deprived himself of his house under the Regulations. Complaint was made that the procedure did not allow an appeal and therefore deprived him of his rights under article 6.
Held: . .
Appeal from – 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 – 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 – Lambeth London Borough Council v Ireneschild CA 16-Mar-2007
The tenant held a secure tenancy of a first floor flat of the Council. She was severely disabled and argued that the danger of injury meant that she should be allowed to occupy the empty ground floor flat. She complained at the way the authority had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Human Rights

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167733

Mason, Wood, McClelland, Tierney v Regina: CACD 13 Feb 2002

The appellants appealed their convictions on two grounds. First the judge who had heard the case was an acquaintance of the chief constable of the investigating force, and second evidence had been admitted of tape recordings of non-privileged conversations between defendants whilst in the police station. The Chief Constable had authorised the covert operation, and his evidence was subject to challenge.
Held: The judge had properly disclosed his acquaintance with the Chief Constable. He had sought advice from the Senior Presiding Judge after objection was taken, and would keep the question under review.
When testing for bias, the court should ask whether in all the circumstances a fair-minded and informed observer would conclude that there was a real possibility that the tribunal was biased. In this case there was no reason to suspect bias.,br /.As to the tapes, the general approach is not necessarily to exclude evidence because it has been obtained in a way which is contrary to law or contrary to rules contained in the Codes of Practice under PACE. In this case PACE had not been complied with, since other methods of investigation had not been properly tried. The 2000 Act had changed the law, but such tapes would have been admissible before the Act. There was no sufficient unfairness to justify exclusion under PACE. The judge had given a direction about the failure of the defendants to give evidence without allowing either counsel to make submissions, and had erred. The direction should normally follow the Judicial Studies Board guidelines, however in this case, the departure made no difference. Appeal denied.
Lord Woolf said: ‘paragraph 4.3 of a draft code of practice [to be issued under s.71 of RIPA] indicates that a prison cell is within the definition of residential premises. We have heard no argument as to this but even if a prison cell falls within the definition, it does not follow that a police cell is necessarily residential. Further clarification is in our judgment desirable, though we recognise that the existence of RIPA has materially improved the situation and it is certainly desirable that what happens in police cells be treated as intrusive surveillance.’

Judges:

The Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, Mr Justice Mitchell, And, Mr Justice Keith

Citations:

Gazette 21-Mar-2002, [2002] EWCA Crim 385, [2002] 2 Crim App R 38

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 76 78, Human Rights Act 1998, European Convention on Human Rights 5 6 8, Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 71, Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 34

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Bow Street Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate, ex parte Pinochet Ugarte (No 2) HL 15-Jan-1999
A petition was brought to request that a judgment of the House be set aside because the wife of one their lordships, Lord Hoffmann, was as an unpaid director of a subsidiary of Amnesty International which had in turn been involved in a campaign . .
Cited – Porter and Weeks v Magill HL 13-Dec-2001
Councillors Liable for Unlawful Purposes Use
The defendant local councillors were accused of having sold rather than let council houses in order to encourage an electorate which would be more likely to be supportive of their political party. They had been advised that the policy would be . .
Cited – Regina v Bailey and Smith CACD 1993
. .

Cited by:

Cited – Plunkett and Another, Regina v CACD 13-Mar-2013
The defendants appealed against their convictions after admission of secret tape recordings made by the police in breach, said the defendants of the 2000 Act and unlawful. The recordings had been in the police van. The Crown said that this was not a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative, Evidence, Human Rights, Criminal Practice

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167613

Matthews v The Ministry of Defence: QBD 22 Jan 2002

The claimant sought damages for asbestos related diseases, incurred whilst working as an engineer in the Royal Navy. He claimed that the bar on claiming against the Crown infringed his rights to a remedy. The 1987 Act removed the bar to a claim, but not retrospectively. Section 10 of the 1947 Act created a new immunity. Actions against a State are not barred in limine. The Secretary of State may allow an action to proceed, but has the right to prevent an action. Some claims made by persons employed by the State have not been treated as involving the determination of civil rights. The Pellegrin case had now set the test for determining whether an action involved the determination of civil rights, and the test involved looking at the nature of the duties undertaken. The claim also had to relate to et applicant’s conditions of service. This is a claim in tort. Despite the existence of an alternative means of compensation, the clause failed the proportionality test. It is not possible to read the Act in a way which would make it compatible with the Convention, and a declaration of incompatibility was made.

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Keith

Citations:

Times 30-Jan-2002, [2002] EWHC 13 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Crown Proceedings Act 1947 10, European Convention on Human Rights 6(1) 2(1), Crown Proceedings (Armed Forces) Act 1987

Citing:

Cited – Pellegrin v France ECHR 8-Dec-1999
The court modified the approach taken in earlier decisions, that there are excluded from the scope of article 6(1) disputes raised by public servants whose duties typify the specific activities of the public service in so far as the latter is acting . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Matthews v Ministry of Defence CA 29-May-2002
The Ministry appealed against a finding that the Act, which deprived the right of a Crown employee to sue for personal injuries, was an infringement of his human rights.
Held: The restriction imposed by the section was not a procedural . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Armed Forces, Personal Injury

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167423

Regina v Rezvi: HL 24 Jan 2002

Having been convicted of theft, a confiscation order had been made against which the appellant appealed. The Court of Appeal certified a question of whether confiscation provisions under the 1988 Act were in breach of the defendant’s human rights. Are applications for confiscation orders criminal proceedings under the Convention, and if so do the assumptions made infringe the right to a fair trial?
Held: European decisions and Philips indicated clearly that confiscation applications are not separate criminal charges, but rather part of the sentencing process. Even if the Convention had been engaged, the provisions are proportionate and would comply. Lord Steyn said that the legislation is ‘a precise, fair and proportionate response to the important need to protect the public’.
Lord Steyn said: ‘It is a notorious fact that professional and habitual criminals frequently take steps to conceal their profits from crime. Effective but fair powers of confiscating the proceeds of crime are therefore essential. The provisions of the 1988 Act are aimed at depriving such offenders of the proceeds of their criminal conduct. Its purposes are to punish convicted offenders, to deter the commission of further offences and to reduce the profits available to fund further criminal enterprises. These objectives reflect not only national but also international policy. The United Kingdom has undertaken, by signing and ratifying treaties agreed under the auspices of the United Nations and the Council of Europe, to take measures necessary to ensure that the profits of those engaged in drug trafficking or other crimes are confiscated: see the United Nations convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (19 December 1988); Council of Europe Convention on Laundering, Search, Seizure and Confiscation of the Proceeds from Crime, Strasbourg, 8 November 1990. These Conventions are in operation and have been ratified by the United Kingdom.’

Judges:

Lord Slynn of Hadley Lord Browne-Wilkinson Lord Steyn Lord Hope of Craighead Lord Hutton

Citations:

Times 28-Jan-2002, Gazette 06-Mar-2002, [2002] UKHL 1, [2002] 1 All ER 801, [2003] 1 AC 1099, [2002] UKHRR 374, [2002] 2 Cr App Rep (S) 70, [2002] 2 Cr App R 2, [2002] HRLR 19

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1988 Part VI 4, Drug Trafficking Act 1994 72AA, Terrorism Act 2000 Part III, European Convention on Human Rights Art 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – 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 . .
Cited – Her Majesty’s Advocate and Another v Mcintosh PC 5-Feb-2001
(From High Court of Justiciary (Scotland)) The defendant had been convicted of drug trafficking. He complained that the following confiscation order had infringed his human rights being based an assumption of guilt and which was incompatible with . .
Cited – Phillips v United Kingdom ECHR 5-Jul-2001
Having been convicted of drug trafficking, an application was made for a confiscation under the 1994 Act. On the civil balance of proof, and applying the assumptions under the Act, an order was made. The applicant claimed that his article 6 rights . .

Cited by:

Applied – 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 Deprince CACD 9-Mar-2004
The defendant appealed against a confiscation order made under the drug trafficking legislation. The judge had made a finding that there would be a serious chance of unfairness in the order but had continued nonetheless, by reducing the relative . .
Cited – Capewell v Revenue and Customs and Another HL 31-Jan-2007
The defendant appealed against an order regarding the remuneration of a receiver appointed to administer a restraint order placed on the assets of the defendant under the 1988 Act on the basis of an allegation that the defendant had been involved in . .
Cited – May, Regina v HL 14-May-2008
The defendant had been convicted of involvement in a substantial VAT fraud, and made subject to a confiscation order. He was made subject to a confiscation order in respect of the amounts lost to the fraud where he was involved, but argued that the . .
Cited – Knaggs v Regina CACD 13-Jul-2009
The defendant appealed against a confiscation order, made on the basis of evidence secured from a probe installed in his car. He had made clear that he disputed the recordings. A second judge had inherited the proceedings, and ruled that he could . .
Cited – Peacock, Re SC 22-Feb-2012
The defendant had been convicted of drugs offences, and sentenced under the 1994 Act. The gains he had made exceeded his then assets. Later he acquired further property honestly, and the Court now considered whether those assets could be taken to . .
Cited – Waya, Regina v SC 14-Nov-2012
The defendant appealed against confiscation orders made under the 2002 Act. He had bought a flat with a substantial deposit from his own resources, and the balance from a lender. That lender was repaid after he took a replacement loan. He was later . .
Cited – Virgin Media Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v Zinga CACD 24-Jan-2014
Zinga had been convicted of conspiracy to defraud in a private prosecution brought by Virgin Media. After dismissal of the appeal against conviction, Virgin pursued confiscation proceedings. Zinga appealed against refusal of its argument that it was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Sentencing, Human Rights

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167438

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 whether the statutory provision infringed the right to a fair trial was for each particular case which came before the court. The confiscation process had to be looked at as against both limbs of article 6. Having reversed the burden of proof, the provision must look at both in the light of article 6 and also against and in deference to the policy which the legislature considered was in the public interest. The provisions of the Human Rights Act were not retrospective.

Judges:

Lord Slynn of Hadley Lord Browne-Wilkinson Lord Steyn Lord Hope of Craighead Lord Hutton

Citations:

Gazette 22-Mar-2001, Times 28-Dec-2000, Times 28-Jan-2002, Gazette 06-Mar-2002, [2002] UKHL 2, [2002] 2 WLR 235, [2002] 1 All ER 815, [2002] 2 Cr App R (S) 71, [2002] HRLR 20, [2002] 2 Cr App R 3

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Human Rights Act 1998, Proceeds of Crime Act 1995, Drug Trafficking Act 1994 4(3), European Convention on Human Rights 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Regina v Rezvi HL 24-Jan-2002
Having been convicted of theft, a confiscation order had been made against which the appellant appealed. The Court of Appeal certified a question of whether confiscation provisions under the 1988 Act were in breach of the defendant’s human rights. . .
Applied – Phillips v United Kingdom ECHR 5-Jul-2001
Having been convicted of drug trafficking, an application was made for a confiscation under the 1994 Act. On the civil balance of proof, and applying the assumptions under the Act, an order was made. The applicant claimed that his article 6 rights . .
Appeal from – Regina v Benjafield, Leal, Rezvi and Milford CACD 21-Dec-2000
Lord Woolf MR said that where the original proceedings are brought by a public authority, an appeal is part of those proceedings to which section 22(4) applies: ‘In our judgment, where the original proceedings are brought by, or at the instigation . .
Cited – Phillips v United Kingdom ECHR 5-Jul-2001
Having been convicted of drug trafficking, an application was made for a confiscation under the 1994 Act. On the civil balance of proof, and applying the assumptions under the Act, an order was made. The applicant claimed that his article 6 rights . .

Cited by:

Cited – Parochial Church Council of the Parish of Aston Cantlow and Wilmcote with Billesley, Warwickshire v Wallbank and another HL 26-Jun-2003
Parish Councils are Hybrid Public Authorities
The owners of glebe land were called upon as lay rectors to contribute to the cost of repairs to the local church. They argued that the claim was unlawful by section 6 of the 1998 Act as an act by a public authority incompatible with a Convention . .
Cited – Regina v Deprince CACD 9-Mar-2004
The defendant appealed against a confiscation order made under the drug trafficking legislation. The judge had made a finding that there would be a serious chance of unfairness in the order but had continued nonetheless, by reducing the relative . .
Cited – Grayson and Barnham v The United Kingdom ECHR 23-Sep-2008
Each applicant had been subject to confiscation in criminal proceedings relating to drugs offences. They complained that the legislation had reversed the burden of proof.
Held: ‘it was not incompatible with the notion of a fair hearing in . .
Cited – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Human Rights, Criminal Sentencing

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167437

Smart v Sheffield City Council: Central Sunderland Housing Company Limited v Wilson: CA 25 Jan 2002

Each tenant had become unintentionally homeless, and was granted a non-secure tenancy of accommodation under section 193. Complaints of nuisance were received from neighbours. Possession orders were obtained and now challenged under the Human Rights Act. The service of the original notice to quit, engaged the Human Rights Act, but the action taken was lawful and proportionate. So far as such non-secure tenancies were concerned, the judge was not obliged to grant possession, but had a discretion.
Held: The homes were to be treated as such despite any lack of security. Nevertheless, the balance of interests under Article 8(2) was properly struck. There are some statutory regimes under which the balance of interests arising under Article 8(2) has in all its essentials been struck by the legislature and under which a court, before ordering a defendant to give up possession of accommodation where he has been living, is not obliged to adjudicate upon the specific merits of coercive action in an individual case. The word ‘engaged’ is not part of the vocabulary of human rights law.

Judges:

Lord Justice Thorpe, Lord Justice Laws, And, Lord Justice Kay

Citations:

Times 20-Feb-2002, Gazette 15-Mar-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 4, [2002] LGR 467, [2002] HLR 639

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Housing Act 1996 193, Housing Act 1985 21(1), European Convention on Human Rights 8.2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Wrexham County Borough Council v Berry; South Buckinghamshire District Council v Porter and another; Chichester District Council v Searle and others HL 22-May-2003
The appellants challenged the refusal to grant them injunctions to prevent Roma parking caravans on land they had purchased.
Held: Parliament had given to local authorities exclusive jurisdiction on matters of planning policy, but when an . .
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 – 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 – Price and others v Leeds City Council CA 16-Mar-2005
The defendant gypsies had moved their caravans onto land belonging to the respondents without planning permission. They appealed an order to leave saying that the order infringed their rights to respect for family life.
Held: There had been . .
Cited – Nadine Delson v London Borough of Lambeth CA 19-Nov-2002
Application for permission to appeal against refusal of second application for permission to apply for judicial review.
Held: It was not sustainable to suggest that the section was incompatible with the cliamant’s human rights. Leave to appeal . .
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 – McGlynn v Welwyn Hatfield District Council CA 1-Apr-2009
The appellant was a non-secure tenant of the respondent. It had served a notice to quit and he now appealed against an order for possession on public law grounds.
Held: There had been a delay between the issue of the notice to quit and the . .
Cited – L, Regina (On the Application of) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis SC 29-Oct-2009
Rebalancing of Enhanced Disclosure Requirements
The Court was asked as to the practice of supplying enhanced criminal record certificates under the 1997 Act. It was said that the release of reports of suspicions was a disproportionate interference in the claimants article 8 rights to a private . .
Cited – Salford City Council v Mullen CA 30-Mar-2010
The court considered the status of decisions to commence proceedings for possession by local authorities against tenants not protected under any statutory scheme. The tenants, on introductory tenancies and under the homelessness regime, argued that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Human Rights, Local Government

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167526

Lee-Hirons v Secretary of State for Justice: SC 27 Jul 2016

The appellant had been detained in a mental hospital after a conviction. Later released, he was recalled, but he was not given written reasons as required by a DoH circular. However the SS referred the recall immediately to the Tribunal. He appealed from refusal of a finding that his subsequent detention had been unlawful.
Held: Though there had been conceded breaches by the SS, ‘there is no link, let alone a direct link, between, on the one hand, the Minister’s wrongful failure for 12 days to provide to the appellant an adequate explanation for his recall and, on the other, the lawfulness of his detention. The failure did not delay reference of his case to the First-tier Tribunal. Nor has the appellant suggested that it delayed institution of the present proceedings. Even if it had created delay, the unequivocal statement of Lord Mance and Lord Hughes in the Kaiyam case about the limited effects of a violation of article 5(4) would appear to exclude the relevance of the delay to the validity of the detention itself.’
The SS did concede an infringement of the claimant’s human rights, and damages had to be assessed, as to which: ‘damages should not be payable to the appellant for the breach of his right under article 5(2) of the Convention any more than that they should be payable for the breach of his right at common law. He has failed to establish that their effects on him were sufficiently grave. Nor would a formal declaration in this court’s order add anything to my recording in this judgment of the Minister’s concessions’

Judges:

Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Kerr, Lord Wilson, Lord Reed, Lord Toulson

Citations:

[2016] UKSC 46, [2017] AC 52, [2016] 3 WLR 590, [2016] Med LR 551, [2016] WLR(D) 424, (2016) 151 BMLR 1, (2016) 19 CCL Rep 383, UKSC 2014/0248

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD, SC, SC Summary

Statutes:

Human Rights Act 1998, Mental Health Act 1983 42(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At Admn – Lee-Hirons, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and Another Admn 28-Jun-2013
This case raises, among other matters, an issue about whether reasons for a restricted patient’s recall to detention in a hospital have to be provided orally or in writing. . .
Appeal from – Lee-Hirons, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Justice and Another CA 1-May-2014
The Court was asked significant questions as to the procedure to be followed when a person is recalled by the Secretary of State to be detained in a hospital under the power conferred by section 42(3) of the Mental Health Act 1983. The Appellant . .
Cited – Christie v Leachinsky HL 25-Mar-1947
Arrested Person must be told basis of the Arrest
Police officers appealed against a finding of false imprisonment. The plaintiff had been arrested under the 1921 Act, but this provided no power of arrest (which the appellant knew). The officers might lawfully have arrested the plaintiff for the . .
Cited – X v United Kingdom ECHR 5-Nov-1981
(Commission) The application was made a patient, restricted under the 1959 Act. A mental health review tribunal which concluded that the continued detention of a restricted patient was no longer justified had power to recommend but not to order the . .
Cited – Fox, Campbell and Hartley v The United Kingdom ECHR 30-Aug-1990
The court considered the required basis for a reasonable suspicion to found an arrest without a warrant: ‘The ‘reasonableness’ of the suspicion on which an arrest must be based forms an essential part of the safeguard against arbitrary arrest and . .
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 . .
Cited – Cullen v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary (Northern Ireland) HL 10-Jul-2003
The claimant had been arrested. He had been refused access to a solicitor whilst detaiined, but, in breach of statutory duty, he had not been given reasons as to why access was denied. He sought damages for that failure.
Held: If damages were . .
Cited – MM, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 6-Jul-2007
Challenge to directions given by the respondent for the recall of the appellant to a mental hospital.
Held: The breach of a condition would, if of ‘sufficient significance’ justify a recall. . .
Cited – Greenfield, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 16-Feb-2005
The appellant had been charged with and disciplined for a prison offence. He was refused legal assistance at his hearing, and it was accepted that the proceedings involved the determination of a criminal charge within the meaning of article 6 of the . .
Cited – Saadi v United Kingdom ECHR 29-Jan-2008
(Grand Chamber) The applicant sought judicial review of the decision to detain him for a short period while his asylum claim was being subject to fast-track processing. The decision was made pursuant to a policy under which all asylum claimants . .
Cited – Mandalia v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 14-Oct-2015
The Court considered the guidance given to UK Border Agency case workers when considering document submitted by persons applying for leave to enter or stay in the UK as foreign students. M had applied to study here, but had not accompanied his . .
Cited – Lumba (WL) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 23-Mar-2011
The claimants had been detained under the 1971 Act, after completing sentences of imprisonment pending their return to their home countries under deportations recommended by the judges at trial, or chosen by the respondent. They challenged as . .
Cited – Kambadzi (previously referred to as SK (Zimbabwe)) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 25-May-2011
False Imprisonment Damages / Immigration Detention
The respondent had held the claimant in custody, but had failed to follow its own procedures. The claimant appealed against the rejection of his claim of false imprisonment. He had overstayed his immigration leave, and after convictions had served a . .
Cited – Faulkner, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and Another SC 1-May-2013
The applicants had each been given a life sentence, but having served the minimum term had been due to have the continued detention reviewed to establish whether or not continued detention was necessary for the protection of the pblic. It had not . .
Cited – Zagidulina v Russia ECHR 2-May-2013
The Court limited itself to article 5(1)(e), when it stated that: ‘the notion of ‘lawfulness’ in the context of article 5(1)(e) of the Convention might have a broader meaning than in national legislation. Lawfulness of detention necessarily presumes . .
Cited – Haney and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Justice SC 10-Dec-2014
The four claimants, each serving indeterminate prison sentences, said that as they approached the times when thy might apply for parol, they had been given insufficient support and training to meet the requirements for release. The courts below had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Health

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.567607

Lee-Hirons, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Justice and Another: CA 1 May 2014

The Court was asked significant questions as to the procedure to be followed when a person is recalled by the Secretary of State to be detained in a hospital under the power conferred by section 42(3) of the Mental Health Act 1983. The Appellant contends that his recall was effected unlawfully, and that his subsequent detention was unlawful. He claims damages for false imprisonment or pursuant to the Human Rights Act 1998.

Judges:

Jackson, Patten LJJ, Sir Stanley Burnton

Citations:

[2014] EWCA Civ 553, [2014] EWCA Civ 514, [2015] QB 385, [2014] WLR(D) 183, (2014) 138 BMLR 44, [2015] 1 QB 385, [2015] 2 WLR 256, 138 BMLR 44

Links:

Bailii, Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Human Rights Act 1998 8, Mental Health Act 1983 42(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Lee-Hirons, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and Another Admn 28-Jun-2013
This case raises, among other matters, an issue about whether reasons for a restricted patient’s recall to detention in a hospital have to be provided orally or in writing. . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Lee-Hirons v Secretary of State for Justice SC 27-Jul-2016
The appellant had been detained in a mental hospital after a conviction. Later released, he was recalled, but he was not given written reasons as required by a DoH circular. However the SS referred the recall immediately to the Tribunal. He appealed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Human Rights

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.525632

Lee-Hirons, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and Another: Admn 28 Jun 2013

This case raises, among other matters, an issue about whether reasons for a restricted patient’s recall to detention in a hospital have to be provided orally or in writing.

Judges:

Dingemans

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 1784 (Admin), [2015] 2 WLR 256, [2015] 1 QB 385

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Mental Health Act 1983 42(3), Human Rights Act 1998 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Lee-Hirons, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Justice and Another CA 1-May-2014
The Court was asked significant questions as to the procedure to be followed when a person is recalled by the Secretary of State to be detained in a hospital under the power conferred by section 42(3) of the Mental Health Act 1983. The Appellant . .
At Admn – Lee-Hirons v Secretary of State for Justice SC 27-Jul-2016
The appellant had been detained in a mental hospital after a conviction. Later released, he was recalled, but he was not given written reasons as required by a DoH circular. However the SS referred the recall immediately to the Tribunal. He appealed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health, Human Rights

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.511343

Zagidulina v Russia: ECHR 2 May 2013

The Court limited itself to article 5(1)(e), when it stated that: ‘the notion of ‘lawfulness’ in the context of article 5(1)(e) of the Convention might have a broader meaning than in national legislation. Lawfulness of detention necessarily presumes a ‘fair and proper procedure’, including the requirement ‘that any measure depriving a person of his liberty should issue from and be executed by an appropriate authority and should not be arbitrary’ (see Winterwerp, cited above, 45, Johnson v The United Kingdom, 24 October 1997, 60, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-VII, and more recently Venios v Greece, Application No 33055/08, 48, 5 July 2011 with further references).’

Citations:

11737/06 – Chamber Judgment, [2013] ECHR 398

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Haney and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Justice SC 10-Dec-2014
The four claimants, each serving indeterminate prison sentences, said that as they approached the times when thy might apply for parol, they had been given insufficient support and training to meet the requirements for release. The courts below had . .
Cited – Lee-Hirons v Secretary of State for Justice SC 27-Jul-2016
The appellant had been detained in a mental hospital after a conviction. Later released, he was recalled, but he was not given written reasons as required by a DoH circular. However the SS referred the recall immediately to the Tribunal. He appealed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Prisons

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.491944