A judge, having given judgment in an appeal case involving the application of the convention on Human Rights, wrote and published an article critical of the convention, and of its application in national law. The appeal decision was set aside, since the reality or appearance of objective impartiality which was clearly required by both common law and the convention had been lost. The requirement for impartiality was both objective and subjective.
Lord Justice General and Lady Cosgrove and Lord Sutherland
Times 14-Apr-2000, [2000] ScotHC 32
Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights
Scotland
Citing:
See Also – Note of Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence By Lieuwe Hoekstra and Jan Van Rijs and Ronny Van Rijs and Hendrik Van Rijs v Her Majesty’s Advocate HCJ 28-Jan-2000
. .
See Also – Lieuwe Hoekstra and Jan Van Rijs and Ronny Van Rijs and Endrik Van Rijs v Her Majesty’s Advocate HCJ 7-Mar-2000
. .
Cited by:
See Also – Lieuwe Hoekstra and Jan Van Rijs and Ronny Van Rijs and Hendrik Van Rijs v Her Majesty’s Advocate HCJ 2-Jun-2000
. .
See Also – Hoekstra and Others v Her Majesty’s Advocate High Court of Justiciary PC 26-Oct-2000
The Privy Council has no standing to act as a general court of appeal on Scottish law. The jurisdiction given to it by the Act, was limited as prescribed by the Act to what are called devolution issues, issues related to the acts of devolution. Not . .
See Also – Hoekstra and Van Rijs etc v Her Majesty’s Advocate HCJ 18-Jan-2001
. .
See Also – Hoekstra and Van Rijs and Van Rijs and Van Rijs v Her Majesty’s Advocate HCJ 23-Jan-2002
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 14 September 2021; Ref: scu.81423
