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 Convention, that the deputy controller was not an independent tribunal and that the appellant was wrongly denied legal representation of his own choosing, and the appeal was limited to damages.
Held: The ECHR has been reluctant to allow a violation of article 6 to be, in itself, just satisfaction under article 41 only where the Court finds a causal connection between the violation found and the loss for which an applicant claims to be compensated. Where, having found a violation of article 6, the ECHR has made an award of monetary compensation under article 41, under either of the heads of general damages it considered in this opinion, whether for loss of procedural opportunity or anxiety and frustration, the sums awarded have been noteworthy for their modesty. It was argued awards should not be on the low side as compared with tortious awards, and that English courts should be free to depart from the scale of damages awarded by the European Court using English awards as comparators. That was incorrect the purpose of the 1998 Act was to avoid for claimants the need to go to Strasbourg, not to make greater awards than would be available there. The finding itself should be treated as just satisfaction save only in exceptional circumstances.
Lord Bingham pointed out that Convention claims have very different objectives from civil actions. Where civil actions are designed essentially to compensate claimants for their losses, Convention claims are intended rather to uphold minimum human rights standards and to vindicate those rights.
Judges:
Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Baroness Hale of Richmond, Lord Carswell, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood
Citations:
[2005] UKHL 14, Times 18-Feb-2005, [2005] 1 WLR 673
Links:
Statutes:
European Convention on Human Rights 5, Human Rights Act 1998 8
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Regina (Carroll and Another) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Regina (Greenfield) v Same CA 19-Jul-2001
The applicants had been disciplined whilst in prison, and suffered various penalties including the loss of remission. They argued that the penalties had been imposed in breach of their human rights and that the protection given for intimate searches . .
Cited – Piersack v Belgium ECHR 1-Oct-1982
Hudoc applicant convicted of murder complained that his right to a fair trial under Article 6(1) had been denied because the trial court had been presided over by a Judge who, when senior deputy procureur, had . .
Cited – GW v United Kingdom ECHR 15-Jun-2004
. .
Cited – Ezeh and Connors v The United Kingdom ECHR 15-Jul-2002
The applicants were serving prisoners. They had been the subject of disciplinary proceedings in which they had been denied the right to representation. They claimed an infringement of their right to a fair trial.
Held: Both proceedings had . .
Cited – Bonisch v Austria ECHR 6-May-1985
Hudoc ‘. . . in the present case an award of just satisfaction can only be based on the fact that the applicant did not have, before the Austrian courts, the benefit of the guarantees of Article 6(1).’ . .
Cited – 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 . .
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 – Perks and others v The United Kingdom ECHR 12-Oct-1999
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) No violation of Art. 5-1; Art. 5-5 inapplicable; Violation of Art. 6-1; Violation of Art. 6-3-c; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award (Perks); Non-pecuniary damage . .
Cited – Delta v France ECHR 19-Dec-1990
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1+6-3-d; Damage – financial award; Costs and expenses – claim rejected . .
Cited – Vidal v Belgium ECHR 22-Apr-1992
Hudoc Violation of Art. 6; Just satisfaction reserved . .
Cited – Pelissier and Sassi v France ECHR 25-Mar-1999
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1+6-3-a; Violation of Art. 6-1+6-3-b; Violation of Art. 6-1; Pecuniary damage – financial award; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and . .
Cited – Benham v United Kingdom ECHR 8-Feb-1995
Legal Aid was wrongfully refused where a tax or fine defaulter was liable to imprisonment, and the lack of a proper means enquiry, made imprisonment of poll tax defaulter unlawful. A poll tax defaulter had been wrongly committed to prison by . .
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 – Zielinski v France ECHR 28-Oct-1999
Hudoc The applicants challenged a retrospective change in employment law under article 6(1).
Held: The court stated that while in principle the legislature is not precluded in civil matters from adopting . .
Cited – Edwards and Lewis v United Kingdom ECHR 27-Oct-2004
E had been convicted of possession of heroin with intent to supply, and L of possession of counterfeit currency. In each case public interest certificates had been obtained to withold evidence from them. The judge had refused requests to exclude . .
Cited – Kingsley v The United Kingdom ECHR 7-Nov-2000
The judicial review procedure which restricted the matters which it considered so as to exclude consideration of the allegation by the applicant that the tribunal whose decision he challenged had not been impartial, was insufficient to support the . .
Cited – Polskiego v Poland ECHR 21-Sep-2004
. .
Cited – Kingsley v The United Kingdom (No 2) ECHR 28-May-2002
The finding that a party had been denied a fair trial may of itself be sufficient compensation. The applicant had been excluded from management of licensed casinos. The appeal board had been found to have given the appearance of bias against him. . .
Cited – Lewis v The United Kingdom ECHR 25-Nov-2003
Police had made secret tape recordings of conversations in the claimant’s home, which recordings had later been used as evidence against him, and had led to his conviction.
Held: At the time of the recordings there was no statutory system . .
Cited – Edwards and Lewis v The United Kingdom ECHR 22-Jul-2003
(Commission) The claimants said that the procedures used to secure their convictions amounted to entrapment, and that UK criminal procedures did not give sufficient protection so as to provide a fair trial. One was arrested with heroin, and the . .
Cited – Davies v The United Kingdom ECHR 16-Jul-2002
The applicant had been subject to applications for his disqualification from acting as a company director. The Secretary of State waited until the last day before issuing proceedings, and the proceedings were then delayed another three years pending . .
Cited – Goddi v Italy ECHR 9-Apr-1984
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-3-c; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award . .
Cited – Hooper v United Kingdom ECHR 16-Nov-2004
The defendant had appeared in court on a charge of assault. The magistrate considered that he might be unruly and withoutmore bound him over to keep the peace. In the absence of any surety, he was committed to custody.
Held: The proceedings . .
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 – Weeks v The United Kingdom ECHR 2-Mar-1987
The applicant, aged 17, was convicted of armed robbery and sentenced to life imprisonment in the interests of public safety, being considered by the trial judge on appeal to be dangerous.
Held: ‘The court agrees with the Commission and the . .
Cited – O v The United Kingdom ECHR 8-Jul-1987
Hudoc Violation of Art. 6-1; Just satisfaction reserved
Hudoc Judgment (Just satisfaction) Costs and expenses – struck out of the list (friendly settlement); . .
Cited – Lechner And Hess v Austria ECHR 23-Apr-1987
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1; Pecuniary damage – financial award; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses award – domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses . .
Cited – Regina (Bernard and Another) v Enfield Borough Council Admn 25-Oct-2002
The claimants were husband and wife. They had six children. The wife was severely disabled and confined to a wheelchair. The defendant Council provided the family with a small house but in breach, as they ultimately accepted, of section 21(1) (a) of . .
Cited – De Geouffre De La Pradelle v France ECHR 16-Dec-1992
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); Violation of Art. 6-1; Not necessary to examine Art. 13; Pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses . .
Cited – 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, . .
Cited – Robins v The United Kingdom ECHR 23-Sep-1997
Over-long delay by court system in settling amount of costs constituted breach of human rights; order made in 1991, not settled till 1995 . .
Cited – 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 . .
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 – Nikolova v Bulgaria ECHR 25-Mar-1999
(Grand Chamber) The claimant had been detained for long periods after coming under suspicion of theft of large sums. Her detention had initially been ordered by prosecutors. Her initial appeals against her detention were also decided by prosecutors. . .
Cited by:
Cited – Begum (otherwise SB), Regina (on the Application of) v Denbigh High School HL 22-Mar-2006
The student, a Muslim wished to wear a full Islamic dress, the jilbab, but this was not consistent with the school’s uniform policy. She complained that this interfered with her right to express her religion.
Held: The school’s appeal . .
Cited – Watkins v Home Office and others HL 29-Mar-2006
The claimant complained of misfeasance in public office by the prisons for having opened and read protected correspondence whilst he was in prison. The respondent argued that he had suffered no loss. The judge had found that bad faith was . .
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 . .
Cited – Al-Jedda v Secretary of State for Defence CA 29-Mar-2006
The applicant had dual Iraqi and British nationality. He was detained by British Forces in Iraq under suspicion of terrorism, and interned.
Held: His appeal failed. The UN resolution took priority over the European Convention on Human Rights . .
Cited – Van Colle and Another v Chief Constable of the Hertfordshire Police CA 24-Apr-2007
The deceased had acted as a witness in an intended prosecution. He had sought protection after being threatened. No effective protection was provided, and he was murdered. The chief constable appealed a finding of liability.
Held: The . .
Cited – Somerville v Scottish Ministers HL 24-Oct-2007
The claimants complained of their segregation while in prison. Several preliminary questions were to be decided: whether damages might be payable for breach of a Convention Right; wheher the act of a prison governor was the act of the executive; . .
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 – 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 – Michael and Others v The Chief Constable of South Wales Police and Another SC 28-Jan-2015
The claimants asserted negligence in the defendant in failing to provide an adequate response to an emergency call, leading, they said to the death of their daughter at the hands of her violent partner. They claimed also under the 1998 Act. The . .
Cited – Shahid v Scottish Ministers (Scotland) SC 14-Oct-2015
The appellant convicted of a racially-aggravated vicious murder. Since conviction he had spent almost five years in segregation from other prisoners. The appellant now alleged that some very substantial periods of segregation had been in breach of . .
Cited – Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis v DSD and Another SC 21-Feb-2018
Two claimants had each been sexually assaulted by a later notorious, multiple rapist. Each had made complaints to police about their assaults but said that no effective steps had been taken to investigate the serious complaints.
Held: The . .
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 . .
Cited – Hemmati and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 27-Nov-2019
The Home Secretary appealed from a finding that illegally entered asylum seekers had been unlawfully detained pending removal. The five claimants had travelled through other EU member states before entering the UK. The court considered inter alia . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Prisons, Damages, Human Rights
Updated: 14 September 2022; Ref: scu.222767