Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8 ; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient ; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings
The applicant had been under investigation by the police. Whilst under arrest, his garage was fitted with a secret recording device, and the evidence gathered was later used against him at his trial.
Held: The secret recording in a manner which was not subject to proper regulation was an infringement of the applicant’s right to private life. The Police Act was insufficient protection.
Judges:
Mr M Pellonpaa, President, Sir Nicolas Bratza, Mrs E. Palm, Mrs V. Str Anick, Mr M. Fischbach, Mr J. Casadevall, Mr S. Pavlovschi
Citations:
50015/99, Times 10-Jun-2003, [2003] ECHR 248
Links:
Statutes:
European Convention on Human Rights 8.1, Police Act 1997
Jurisdiction:
Human Rights
Citing:
Appeal from – Regina v Hewitson, Bramich, Vincent CACD 24-Sep-1998
The defendants appealed their conviction after admission of evidence taken from secret tape recordings taken from a recording device hidden in the garage of one of the defendants.
Held: The evidence had been properly admitted. It was not . .
Cited – Khan v The United Kingdom ECHR 12-May-2000
Evidence was acknowledged to have been obtained unlawfully and in breach of another article of the Convention. The police had installed covert listening devices on private property without the knowledge or consent of the owner. UK national law did . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Practice
Updated: 28 June 2022; Ref: scu.182523
