

Links: Home \| swarblaw - law discussions		swarb.co.uk - law index These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases. Â
		Human Rights - From: 1994 To: 1994 This page lists 90 cases, and was prepared on 28 July 2015. Â Yanasik -v- Tukey (1994) 74 DR 14 1994 ECHR Human Rights, Education (Commission) A reasonable denial of the right to education does not violate the Convention. 1 Citers Â Â Otto Preminger Institute -v- Austria; ECHR 1994 - (1994) 19 EHRR 3 Â Taylor -v- United Kingdom (1994) 79-A DR 127 1994 ECHR Human Rights 1 Citers Â Peters -v- Netherlands 77A DR 75 (1994) 1994 ECHR Human Rights, Health The court considered the right not to be subjected to compulsory medical interference. European Convention on Human Rights 1 Citers Â Grice -v- United Kingdom 22564/93 1994 ECHR Human Rights, Human Rights, Prisons (Year?) The applicant was a serving prisoner suffering from AIDS, who complained that aids sufferers were being discriminated against because unlike those suffering other medical conditions they were not released early on compassionate grounds. The Commission found no evidence of different treatment, but did say that where procedures relating to the release of prisoners appear to operate in a discriminatory manner: "The Commission has held that this may raise issues under Article 5 in conjunction with Article 14". European Convention on Human Rights 5 14 1 Citers Â Grice -v- United Kingdom 22564/93 1994 ECHR Human Rights, Human Rights, Prisons (Year?) The applicant was a serving prisoner suffering from AIDS, who complained that aids sufferers were being discriminated against because unlike those suffering other medical conditions they were not released early on compassionate grounds. The Commission found no evidence of different treatment, but did say that where procedures relating to the release of prisoners appear to operate in a discriminatory manner: "The Commission has held that this may raise issues under Article 5 in conjunction with Article 14". European Convention on Human Rights 5 14 1 Citers Â Kemmache -v- France 20968/92; [1994] ECHR 55 10 Jan 1994 ECHR Human Rights European Convention on Human Rights [ Bailii ] Â Ksct Ks Ac -v- Switzerland 19117/91; [1994] ECHR 52 12 Jan 1994 ECHR Human Rights European Convention on Human Rights [ Bailii ] Â Hurtado -v- Switzerland [1994] ECHR 1; 17549/90; [1994] ECHR 1 28 Jan 1994 ECHR Human Rights [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Regina -v- Secretary of State Home Department, ex parte Gallagher Ind Summary, 28 February 1994; Times, 16 February 1994 16 Feb 1994 CA Crime, Human Rights The Home Secretary need not give reasons for exclusion orders made for national security purposes. Prevention of Terrorism Act 1989 4 - Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act 1989 Â Â R (Mrs) -v- Central Independent Television Plc; CA 17-Feb-1994 - Independent, 17 February 1994; [1994] Fam 192; [1994] 2 FLR 151; [1994] 3 All ER 641 Â Â Regina -v- Chief Constable of South Wales and Another Ex Parte Merrick; QBD 17-Feb-1994 - Independent, 01 April 1994; Times, 17 February 1994; [1994] 1 WLR 663 Â Tripodi -v- Italy [1994] ECHR 4; 13743/88; [1994] ECHR 4 22 Feb 1994 ECHR Human Rights Hudoc No violation of Art. 6-3-c [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Raimondo -v- Italy [1994] ECHR 3; 12954/87; (1994) 18 EHRR 237 22 Feb 1994 ECHR Human Rights, Police The applicant was arrested and placed under house arrest on charges relating to his association with the Mafia. As an interim measure some of his property was seized. The proceedings ended in his acquittal. He claimed that the seizure of his property was a violation of his rights under A1P1. Held: His complaint was dismissed.The procedure was "not comparable to a criminal sanction because it was designed to prevent the commission of offences." It followed that the proceedings concerning the supervision did not involve the determination of a criminal charge, and article 6 did not apply. The seizure, as a provisional measure intended to ensure that property which appeared to be the fruit of unlawful activities carried out to the detriment of the community could subsequently be confiscated if necessary, was justified by the general interest. In view of the extremely dangerous economic power of an organisation like the Mafia, it could not be said that taking the step of seizing the property at an early stage of the proceedings was disproportionate to the aim pursued. There was an additional complaint that the property was not only seized but confiscated. However, the confiscation order was rescindable and had in fact been rescinded. In practical terms it entailed no additional restriction to the seizure, and therefore the respondent state was held not to have overstepped the margin of appreciation available to it. European Convention on Human Rights 6 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Â Burghartz -v- Switzerland; ECHR 22-Feb-1994 - Times, 08 April 1994; [1994] ECHR 2; 16213/90; (1994) 18 EHRR 101 Â Fredin -v- Sweden (No 2) 18928/91; [1994] ECHR 5 23 Feb 1994 ECHR Human Rights, Land Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1; Non-pecuniary damage - financial award; Costs and expenses partial award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Bendenoun -v- France 12547/86; (1994) 18 EHRR 54; [1994] ECHR 7; [1994] ECHR 7 24 Feb 1994 ECHR Human Rights, Criminal Practice The applicant complained of non-disclosure by the prosecution. Held: His application failed because the undisclosed material had not been relied on by the prosecution and he had given no sufficiently specific reasons for requesting the material in question. The case concerned a provision in the tax code which was applicable to all citizens. No violation of Art. 6-1; Not necessary to examine P1-1 European Conventtion on Human Rights 6.1 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Â Casado Coca -v- Spain; ECHR 24-Feb-1994 - Times, 01 April 1994; [1994] ECHR 8; 15450/89; (1994) 18 EHRR 1 Â Boyle -v- The United Kingdom 16580/90; (1994) 19 EHRR 179; [1994] ECHR 9 28 Feb 1994 ECHR Human Rights The court considered whether a family relationship could exist where the individuals were not cohabiting: "cohabitation is . . not a prerequisite for the maintenance of family ties which are to fall within the scope of the concept of "family life". Cohabitation is a factor amongst many others, albeit often an important one, to be taken into account when considering the existence or otherwise of family ties." 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Â United Norwest Co-Operatives Ltd -v- Johnstone and Others; CA 1-Mar-1994 - Independent, 01 March 1994; Times, 24 February 1994 Â Associated Newspapers Ltd -v- United Kingdom 1 Mar 1994 ECHR Human Rights, Contempt of Court, Media The newspaper said that a finding against it of contempt of court for publishing material derived from a jury's deliberations infringed its rights of free speech. Held. The complaint was declared inadmissible. "The Commission agrees with the applicants that the fines imposed in the present case amounted to an interference with the applicants' freedom of expression, and also agrees that the interference was 'prescribed by law'. In connection with the question whether the interference pursued a legitimate aim, the Commission finds, as indeed the applicants accept, that the aim was to maintain the authority and impartiality of the judiciary. It would add that the term 'judiciary' comprises the entire machinery of justice, including the proper functioning of the jury system (cf., Euro. Court H.R., Sunday Times judgment of 26 April 1979, Series A no. 30, p. 34, para. 55). It is an important element of that system that jurors should express themselves freely in the jury room without fear of outside disclosure of their views and opinions. To this extent the law may also serve to protect the rights of individual jurors themselves. . . In connection with the legislation as such [the 1981 Act], the Commission notes that the jury system in the United Kingdom is founded on the premise that jurors will express themselves freely in the jury room in the knowledge that what they say will not be used outside. If a juror thought that what he said could subsequently be made public, it is possible that he would bear in mind the future use to which his words might be put, and not just the case in hand. The unlimited prohibition on disclosure is then seen to be an inevitable protection for jurors and can therefore be regarded as 'necessary' in a democratic society which has decided to retain this particular form of jury trial.",br />The Commission added that it was not called on to assess the compatibility of section 8 with article 10 in circumstances involving a conviction for research into jury methods as such, and stated: "The present case relates rather to revelations of the jury's deliberations in one specific case of considerable public interest, including statements by the jurors concerned about the opinions and attitudes of other members of the jury. The applicants were well aware that the information they published was sensitive, and should have been aware that its disclosure could put other individual jurors in an invidious position. The Commission finds, in the circumstances of the present case, that the interference with the applicants' freedom of expression did not take the State beyond the margin of appreciation which it enjoyed." 1 Cites 1 Citers Â Kay -v- United Kingdom 17821/91; [1994] ECHR 51; [1993] ECHR 61 1 Mar 1994 ECHR Human Rights European Convention on Human Rights [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â S A Ondernemingen Jan De Nul -v- Belgium 20907/92; [1994] ECHR 54 2 Mar 1994 ECHR Human Rights European Convention on Human Rights [ Bailii ] Â Whiteside -v- United Kingdom 20357/92; [1994] ECHR 53 7 Mar 1994 ECHR Human Rights European Convention on Human Rights [ Bailii ] Â ISKCON -v- United Kingdom 20490/92; (1994) 18 EHRR CD 133 8 Mar 1994 ECHR Human Rights, Planning, Administrative (Commission) A local authority had served an enforcement notice on ISKCON alleging a material change of use of the land. ISKCON appealed against the notice under section 174(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and after a report by an inspector the Secretary of State largely confirmed the enforcement notice. The High Court and the Court of Appeal rejected ISKCON'S appeal. On a complaint under the Convention the Commission recalled that an appeal under section 289 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 lay only on a point of law but it took into account that the local authority could only take proceedings within the limits of section 174 of that Act and that in accordance with its own structure plans and the policy guidance laid down by the Secretary of State ISKCON could then seek a determination as to whether the legal requirements had been met. Held: The Commission concluded: "The Commission recalls that the High Court dealt with each of ISKCON'S grounds of appeal on its merits, point by point, without ever having to decline jurisdiction. Moreover, it was open to ISKCON to contend in the High Court that findings of fact by the inspector and/or the Secretary of State were unsupported by evidence, as they could have argued that the administrative authorities failed to take into account an actual fact or did take into account an immaterial fact. Finally, the High Court could have interfered with the administrative authorities' decisions if those decisions had been irrational having regard to the facts established by the authorities. It is not the role of article 6 of the Convention to give access to a level of jurisdiction which can substitute its opinion for that of the administrative authorities on questions of expediency and where the courts do not refuse to examine any of the points raised; article 6 gives a right to a court that has 'full jurisdiction' (cf [Zumtobel v Austria (1993) 17 EHRR 116, para 32])." European Convention on Human Rights 6 - Town and Country Planning Act 1990 1 Citers Â DR -v- France 22903/93; [1994] ECHR 56 10 Mar 1994 ECHR Human Rights European Convention on Human Rights [ Bailii ] Â Maria Petrova Jeleva And Others -v- Bulgaria 274/04; [2008] ECHR 354; [2009] ECHR 2158 16 Mar 1994 ECHR Human Rights European Convention on Human Rights [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Muti -v- Italy [1994] ECHR 10; 14146/88; [1994] ECHR 10 23 Mar 1994 ECHR Human Rights Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1; Non-pecuniary damage - financial award; Costs and expenses award - Convention proceedings [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Ravnsborg -v- Sweden [1994] ECHR 11; 14220/88; (1994) 18 EHRR 38; [1994] ECHR 11 23 Mar 1994 ECHR Human Rights Article 6 did not apply to proceedings where the applicant had been fined for making improper statements in written observations before the Swedish courts. The proceedings were regarded as being outside the ambit of article 6 because they were disciplinary in character. European Convention on Human Rights 6 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â De Silva Pontes -v- Portugal 14940/89; (1994) 18 EHRR; [1994] ECHR 12; [1994] ECHR 12 23 Mar 1994 ECHR Human Rights Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (six month period); Violation of Art. 6-1; Pecuniary damage - financial award; Non-pecuniary damage - financial award; Costs and expenses partial award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Scherer -v- Switzerland [1994] ECHR 13; 17116/90; [1994] ECHR 13 25 Mar 1994 ECHR Human Rights [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Regina -v- Secretary of State for Home Department ex parte Silva and Another Times, 01 April 1994 1 Apr 1994 CA Human Rights A Home Office error on a letter as to appeal rights gave rise to no legitimate expectation. Â Strohal -v- Austria 20871/92; HUDOC, 07 April 1994 7 Apr 1994 ECHR MM. A. WEITZEL, P Human Rights (Commission) "the right to freedom of expression by implication also guarantees a "negative right" not to be compelled to express oneself, that is, to remain silent". Inadmissible European Convention on Human Rights 10 1 Citers Â Â Stanford -v- United Kingdom; ECHR 11-Apr-1994 - Ind Summary, 11 April 1994; Times, 08 March 1994; 16757/90; [1994] Ser A No 282-A; [1994] ECHR 6 Â Van De Hurk -v- The Netherlands [1994] ECHR 14; 16034/90; (1994) 18 EHRR 481 19 Apr 1994 ECHR Human Rights, Agriculture Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1 (independent tribunal); No violation of Art. 6-1 (fair trial); Pecuniary damage - claim rejected; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings The applicant was a dairy farmer. Under the scheme operated within the European Community for reducing surplus milk products, he was allocated a milk production quota. His claim for a higher quota was rejected, as was his subsequent appeal before the relevant authorities in his country. He complained that his right to a fair hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal under Article 6(1) of the Convention had been infringed. Held: There had been a violation of Article 6.1 in that the applicant's civil rights and obligations had not been "determined" by a "tribunal" within the meaning of that provision. The binding decision of an impartial tribunal could not be altered by a non-judicial authority to the detriment of an individual. The opportunity to a party to have knowledge and comment must be a genuine one. (Commission) "Article 6(1) extends only to disputes over 'civil rights and obligations' which can be said, at least on arguable grounds, to be recognised under domestic law. Such a dispute must be genuine and of a serious nature; it may relate not only to the actual existence of a right but also to its scope and the manner of its existence and, finally, the result of the proceedings concerning the dispute at issue must be directly decisive for such a right. It is not contested that there was a 'dispute' concerning a 'right' since the allocation of both a milk-quota and an extra levy-free quota conferred a 'right' to the applicant to produce a determined quantity of milk, subject to the condition that a levy must be paid for any surplus. The size of a milk-quota determines for each diary farmer the quantity of milk he is authorised to produce. It is therefore decisive for his income. The fact that in addition a milk-quota is transferable confers to it the character of, in the words the European Court of Human Rights, a 'pecuniary' right. Thus the allocation or refusal of a milk-quota may seriously affect a milk producers business activities. A dispute concerning the granting of a higher quota therefore involves the determination of civil rights and obligations within the meaning of Article 6(1) of the Convention." European Convention on Human Rights 6 1 Citers [ Worldlii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Saraiva De Carvalho -v- Portugal [1994] ECHR 15; 15651/89; [1994] ECHR 15 22 Apr 1994 ECHR Human Rights [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Â Vallee -v- France; ECHR 26-Apr-1994 - [1994] ECHR 17; 22121/93 Â Diaz Ruano -v- Spain [1994] ECHR 16; 16988/90; [1994] ECHR 16 26 Apr 1994 ECHR Human Rights [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â David Brind -v- United Kingdom 18714/91; [1994] ECHR 57 9 May 1994 ECHR Human Rights European Convention on Human Rights [ Bailii ] Â RO -v- United Kingdom Unreported, 11 May 1994; 23094/93 11 May 1994 ECHR Human Rights, Criminal Practice (Commission) The applicant complained that the court had refused to allow him to withdraw his plea of guilty: "It is in the first place for the domestic authorities to determine rules regulating procedural aspects of criminal proceedings, subject to the supervisory jurisdiction of the Convention organs in considering the fairness of proceedings (cf. the Commission's approach in No. 12002/86, Dec. 8.3.88, D.R. 55p.218). The Commission considers that a rule which militates against changes of pleas which are unequivocal and voluntary cannot be said to compromise the fairness of proceedings as such. The Commission will therefore consider the impact of the refusal to permit the applicant to change his plea on the proceedings as a whole." European Convention on Human Rights 6 1 Citers Â Keegan -v- Ireland 16969/90; [1994] ECHR 18; [1994] 3 FCR 165; 1994) 18 EHRR 342; [1994] ECHR 18 26 May 1994 ECHR Human Rights, Family The mother and father were not married, and their relationship broke up before the birth of the child, and the father was excluded from seeing the baby after the first time in hospital. He sought guardianship, and objected to his exclusion from involvement in the decision that the child should be adopted. Held: Family ties come into existence where there is a relationship netween a man and a woman which is stable and where they have children even though they are not married. European Convention on Human Rights 8 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Barbera, Messegue And Jabardo -v- Spain (Article 50) 10588/83;10589/83;10590/83; [1994] ECHR 19 13 Jun 1994 ECHR Human Rights ECHR Judgment (Just Satisfaction) - Pecuniary damage - financial award; Non-pecuniary damage - financial award; Costs and expenses partial award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings. [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â BarberÃ€, MesseguÃ‰ And Jabardo -v- Spain (Article 50) 10588/83 ; 10589/83 ; 105 13 Jun 1994 ECHR Human Rights Hudoc Judgment (Just satisfaction) Pecuniary damage - financial award; Non-pecuniary damage - financial award; Costs and expenses partial award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings 10588/83; 10589/83; 10590/83 Â BarberÃ€, MesseguÃ‰ And Jabardo -v- Spain (Article 50) 10588/83; [1994] ECHR 19 13 Jun 1994 ECHR Human Rights European Convention on Human Rights [ Bailii ] Â De Moor -v- Belgium [1994] ECHR 20; 16997/90; [1994] ECHR 20 23 Jun 1994 ECHR Human Rights Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); Violation of Art. 6-1; Pecuniary damage - claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage - financial award; Costs and expenses partial award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Jacubowski -v- Germany [1994] ECHR 21; 15088/89; [1994] ECHR 21 23 Jun 1994 ECHR Human Rights [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Vendittelli -v- Italy [1994] ECHR 23; 14804/89; [1994] ECHR 23 18 Jul 1994 ECHR Human Rights Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) No violation of Art. 6-1; No violation of Art. 6-1+P1-1; Violation of P1-1; Just satisfaction rejected (out of time) [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Karlheinz Schmidt -v- Germany [1994] ECHR 22; 13580/88; [1994] 18 EHRR 513 18 Jul 1994 ECHR Human Rights, Discrimination Article 14 of the Convention operates not by way of the conferral of a freestanding right not to be discriminated against, but rather by way of complementing the other substantive provisions of the Convention and the Protocols. It has no independent existence, since it has effect solely in relation to the enjoyment of the rights and freedoms safeguarded by those other provisions. European Convention on Human Rghts 14 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Wynne -v- United Kingdom Ind Summary, 26 September 1994; Times, 27 July 1994; 26/1993/421/500; (1994) 19 EHRR 333; 15484/89; [1994] ECHR 24 18 Jul 1994 ECHR Human Rights, Prisons A Discretionary lifer is not entitled to a review by a court of his continued detention. His article five rights were not breached. Where a national court imposed a fixed sentence of imprisonment, the supervision required by article 5.4 was incorporated into that judgment. The court held that the mandatory life sentence belonged to a different category from other sentences because it is imposed automatically as punishment for the offence of murder irrespective of conditions pertaining to the dangerousness of the offender. European Convention on Human Rights 5.4 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Lincoln Anthony Guerra and Another -v- Cipriani Baptiste and others Independent, 29 September 1994; Times, 29 July 1994 29 Jul 1994 PC Human Rights, Criminal Sentencing, Commonwealth (Trinidad and Tobago) A conservatory order could be made by the committee in order to prevent a prisoner being executed before his appeal could be heard by them. [ PC ] Â Regina -v- Secretary of State for Home Dept ex parte Adams Times, 10 August 1994 10 Aug 1994 QBD Human Rights The Home Secretary was not obliged to give reasons for an exclusion order. There could be no appeal without reasons. Â Karakaya -v- France [1994] ECHR 25; 22800/93; [1994] ECHR 25 26 Aug 1994 ECHR Human Rights Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1; Non-pecuniary damage - financial award; Costs and expenses award - Convention proceedings [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Taylor Family & Others -v- United Kingdom 23412/94; [2004] ECHR 729 30 Aug 1994 ECHR Human Rights European Convention on Human Rights [ Bailii ] Â HG v Switzerland 24698/94; Unreported, 6 September 1994 6 Sep 1994 ECHR Human Rights, Extradition The Commission considered the admissibility of a complaint by a Turkish national that extradition from Switzerland to Turkey to serve a sentence imposed for kidnapping and raping a 14 year old girl would infringe article 3 because of Turkish prison conditions, article 6 because his trial in Turkey had not been fair and article 8 because extradition would interfere with respect for his family life in Switzerland. The Commission held in para 2 that expulsion or extradition might "in exceptional circumstances" involve a violation of fundamental rights because of the serious fear of treatment contrary to article 2 or 3 in the requesting country. It further held that an issue might "exceptionally" be raised under article 6 where a fugitive had suffered or risked suffering "a flagrant denial of a fair trial" in the requesting state (emphases added). The Commission held that, on the facts, this was not such a case. It went on to reject the admissibility of the article 8 claim on the facts. 1 Citers Â Â Otto-Preminger-Institut -v- Austria; ECHR 20-Sep-1994 - 13470/87; (1994) 19 EHRR 34; [1994] ECHR 26 Â Debled -v- Belgium [1994] ECHR 28; 13839/88; [1994] ECHR 28 22 Sep 1994 ECHR Human Rights [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Lala -v- The Netherlands [1994] ECHR 30; 14861/89; [1994] ECHR 30 22 Sep 1994 ECHR Human Rights Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1+6-3-c; Not necessary to examine Art. 6-2; Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Pelladoah -v- The Netherlands [1994] ECHR 31; 16737/90; [1994] ECHR 31 22 Sep 1994 ECHR Human Rights Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1+6-3-c; Not necessary to examine Art. 6-2; Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Hentrich -v- France 13616/88 22 Sep 1994 ECHR Human Rights Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); Violation of P1-1; Violation of Art. 6-1; No violation of Art. 6-2; Not necessary to examine Art. 13; Not necessary to examine Art. 14+P1-1; Not necessary to examine Art. 14+6; Not necessary to examine Art. 14+13; Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses award - Convention proceedings; Pecuniary damage - reserved Â Hokkanen -v- Finland 19823/92; (1994) 19 EHRR 139; [1994] ECHR 32; [1994] ECHR 32 23 Sep 1994 ECHR Human Rights, Children Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8; No violation of Art. 6-1; Not necessary to examine Art. 13; Not necessary to examine P7-5; Non-pecuniary damage - financial award; Costs and expenses partial award - domestic proceedings In private law cases, just as much as in public law cases, Article 8 includes "a right for the parent to have measures taken with a view to his or her being reunited with the child and an obligation for the national authorities to take such action." European Convention on Human Rights 8 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Regina -v- Secretary of State for Home Department, Ex Parte Mcquillan Independent, 23 September 1994 23 Sep 1994 QBD Human Rights An exclusion order expressed to be required for national security reasons was to be accepted by the courts without further investigation. Â Saunders -v- United Kingdom Independent, 30 September 1994 30 Sep 1994 ECHR Human Rights Link between self-incrimination and presumption of innocence - use of compulsion. 1 Citers Â Fayed -v- United Kingdom Independent, 06 October 1994; Times, 11 October 1994; 17101/90; [1994] ECHR 27; (1994) 18 EHRR 393 6 Oct 1994 ECHR Company, Human Rights The Secretary of State had appointed inspectors to investigate and report on a company takeover. In their report, which was published, the inspectors made findings which were critical of and damaging to the applicants, who relied on the civil limb of article 6(1) to complain that they had been denied effective access to the courts to challenge the determination made against them. Held: Department of Trade and Industry inspectors are investigators not adjudicators. The absence of a remedy in court, against their report, was not a breach of the Convention. The basic principle underlying article 6(1) is that 'civil claims must be capable of being submitted to a judge for adjudication.' "It is not always an easy matter to trace the dividing line between procedural and substantive limitations of a given entitlement under domestic law. It may sometimes be no more than a question of legislative technique whether the limitation is expressed in terms of the right or the remedy." and "The Inspectors did not adjudicate, either in form or in substance. They themselves said in their report that their findings would not be dispositive of anything. They did not make a legal determination as to criminal or civil liability concerning the Fayed brothers, and in particular concerning the latter's civil right to honour and reputation. . . the object of the proceedings before the Inspectors was not to resolve any dispute (contestation) . . . In short, it cannot be said that the Inspectors' inquiry 'determined' the applicants' civil right to a good reputation, for the purposes of Article 6(1), or that its result was directly decisive for that right." The application failed. European Convention on Human Rights 6 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Secretary of State for the Home Department -v- Robb Times, 21 October 1994; Ind Summary, 10 October 1994 10 Oct 1994 FD Human Rights, Prisons, Health A prisoner of sound mind has the same right to carry on a hunger strike to death, as anyone else. The fact of his imprisonment could not displace that right. Â Tani -v- Finland Unreported, 12 October 1994; 20593/92 12 Oct 1994 ECHR Human Rights, Criminal Practice The applicant had been convicted of murder. He complained to the European Commission of Human Rights that one of the prosecution witnesses had identified him when he was brought into a room where the witness was being questioned. For identification purposes he ought to have been placed in a room along with others of similar appearance. The Commission reminded itself that the task of the Convention organs when considering a complaint under article 6 was to ascertain whether the proceedings, considered as a whole, including the way in which evidence was taken and submitted, were fair. The Commission noted that the applicant's conviction was based on an assessment of a significant amount of corroborative circumstantial evidence; that the identification in question had not played any decisive role in the applicant's conviction; that the applicant was assisted by counsel throughout the proceedings and that he had been able to question the witness in the proceedings before the domestic court. "Having assessed all elements of the domestic proceedings", the Commission rejected the application as manifestly ill-founded. 1 Citers Â Â Jersild -v- Denmark; ECHR 20-Oct-1994 - Times, 20 October 1994; (1994) 19 EHRR 1; [1994] ECHR 33; 15890/89 Â Katte Klitsche De La Grange -v- Italy [1994] ECHR 34; 12539/86; [1994] ECHR 34 27 Oct 1994 ECHR Human Rights Hudoc Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); No violation of P1-1; No violation of Art. 6-1 [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Â Kroon And Others -v- The Netherlands; ECHR 27-Oct-1994 - 18535/91; (1995) 19 EHRR 263; [1994] ECHR 35; [1995] 2 FCR 28 Â Murray -v- The United Kingdom Times, 01 November 1994; 14310/88; [1994] ECHR 39; (1994) 19 EHRR 193 28 Oct 1994 ECHR Ryssdal, President Human Rights, Northern Ireland, Armed Forces, Human Rights The Army's powers of arrest in Northern Ireland, did not breach the European Convention on Human Rights. European Convention on Human Rights 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Murray -v- The United Kingdom Times, 01 November 1994; 14310/88; [1994] ECHR 39; (1994) 19 EHRR 193 28 Oct 1994 ECHR Ryssdal, President Human Rights, Northern Ireland, Armed Forces, Human Rights The Army's powers of arrest in Northern Ireland, did not breach the European Convention on Human Rights. European Convention on Human Rights 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Demai -v- France [1994] ECHR 37; 22904/93; [1994] ECHR 37 28 Oct 1994 ECHR Human Rights [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Maxwell -v- The United Kingdom [1994] ECHR 38; 18949/91; [1994] ECHR 38 28 Oct 1994 ECHR Human Rights Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-3-c; Pecuniary damage - claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Boner -v- United Kingdom (30/2993/425/504), Maxwell -v- Same Times, 01 November 1994; 18711/91; [1994] ECHR 36 1 Nov 1994 ECHR Legal Aid, Human Rights, Prisons The refusal of Legal Aid for appeal for long term prisoners was breach of Human Rights Convention. Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-3-c; Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â T -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department Independent, 04 November 1994; Times, 09 November 1994 9 Nov 1994 CA Lord Lloyd of Berwick Immigration, Human Rights Random violence without a causal connection with any political purpose was not a political crime. Geneva Convention 1951 33(1) 1 Cites 1 Citers Â Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago -v- Phillip Independent, 19 October 1994; Times, 11 October 1994; Gazette, 09 November 1994; [1995] 1 AC 396 9 Nov 1994 PC Lord Woolf Constitutional, Human Rights, Commonwealth A pardon which had been give to insurrectionists was invalid, since it purported to excuse future conduct also, but there had been no duress shown. There is no general power to excuse a crime before it is committed. Lord Woolf: "A pardon must in the ordinary way only relate to offences which have already been committed ....However while a pardon can expunge past offences, a power to pardon cannot be used to dispense with criminal responsibility for an offence which has not yet been committed . This is a principle of general application which is of the greatest importance. The state cannot be allowed to use a power to pardon to enable the law to be set aside by permitting it to be contravened with impunity." The prosecution of a person who in exchange for his co-operation has received an undertaking, promise or representation that he would not be charged is capable of amounting to an abuse of process. Lord Bridge: "However while a pardon can expunge past offences, a power to pardon cannot be used to dispense with criminal responsibility for an offence which has not yet been committed. This is a principle of general application which is of the greatest importance. The state cannot be allowed to use a power to pardon to enable the law to be set aside by permitting it to be contravened with impunity." 1 Cites 1 Citers Â Beaumartin -v- France [1994] ECHR 40; 15287/89; [1994] ECHR 40 24 Nov 1994 ECHR Human Rights Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1; Non-pecuniary damage - financial award; Costs and expenses award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses award - Convention proceedings [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Kemmache -v- France (No 3) [1994] ECHR 41; 17621/91; [1994] ECHR 41 24 Nov 1994 ECHR Human Rights [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Stjerna -v- Finland [1994] ECHR 43; 18131/91; [1994] ECHR 43 25 Nov 1994 ECHR Human Rights Hudoc No violation of Art. 8; No violation of Art. 14+8 [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Ortenberg -v- Autriche [1994] ECHR 42; 12884/87; [1994] 19 EHRR 524; [1994] ECHR 42 25 Nov 1994 ECHR Human Rights Hudoc No violation of Art. 6-1; Lack of jurisdiction (complaint inadmissible) 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Associated Newspapers Limited, Steven And Wolman -v- The United Kingdom 24770/94; [1994] ECHR 58 30 Nov 1994 ECHR Human Rights European Convention on Human Rights [ Bailii ] Â The Holy Monasteries -v- Greece 13092/87;13984/88; [1997] ECHR 53; [1994] ECHR 49 9 Dec 1994 ECHR Human Rights ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) - Preliminary objection rejected (ratione personae); Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); No violation of P1-1; Violation of Art. 6-1; No violation of Art. 9; No violation of Art. 11; No violation of Art. 13; No violation of Art. 14+6; No violation of Art. 14+9; No violation of Art. 14+11; No violation of Art. 14+P1-1; Pecuniary damage - reserved; Costs and expenses award - Convention proceedings. [ ECHR ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Lopez Ostra -v- Spain (1994) 20 EHRR 277; 16798/90; [1994] ECHR 46 9 Dec 1994 ECHR Human Rights A waste treatment plant was built close to the applicant's home in an urban location and the plant released fumes and smells which caused health problems to local residents. Held: A duty exists to take reasonable and appropriate measures to prevent severe environmental pollution from a waste plant from having an adverse effect on the private and family life of a family living in the vicinity. "Naturally, severe environmental pollution may affect individuals' well-being and prevent them from enjoying their homes in such a way as to affect their private and family life adversely, without, however, seriously endangering their health." and "Having regard to the foregoing, and despite the margin of appreciation left to the respondent State, the Court considers that the State did not succeed in striking a fair balance between the interest of the town's economic well-being – that of having a waste-treatment plant - and the applicant's effective enjoyment of her right to respect for her home and her private and family life." and "although the object of Article 8 is essentially that of protecting the individual against arbitrary interference by the public authorities, it does not merely compel the State to abstain from such interference: in addition to this primarily negative undertaking, there may be positive obligations inherent in effective respect for private or family life." European Convention on Human Rights 8 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Ses of Schouten And Meldrum -v- The Netherlands 19006/91; [1994] ECHR 44; 19005/91 9 Dec 1994 ECHR Human Rights ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) - Violation of Art. 6-1; Pecuniary damage - claim rejected; Costs and expenses partial award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings. [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Cases Of Schouten And Meldrum -v- The Netherlands 19005/91; [1994] ECHR 44 9 Dec 1994 ECHR Human Rights European Convention on Human Rights [ Bailii ] Â Stran Greek Refineries and Stratis Andreadis -v- Greece [1994] ECHR 48; 13427/87; Series A no. 301-B; [1994] ECHR 48 9 Dec 1994 ECHR Human Rights Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion, estoppel); Violation of Art. 6-1; Violation of P1-1; Pecuniary damage - financial award; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Hiro Balani -v- Spain [1994] ECHR 45; 18064/91; [1994] ECHR 45 9 Dec 1994 ECHR Human Rights Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1; Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses award - Convention proceedings [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â Ruiz Torija -v- Spain [1994] ECHR 47; 18390/91; [1994] ECHR 47 9 Dec 1994 ECHR Human Rights Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); Violation of Art. 6-1; Pecuniary damage - claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses partial award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â The Holy Monasteries -v- Greece 13092/87; 13984/88; (1995) 20 EHRR 1; 13092/87; 13984/88; [1994] ECHR 49; [1997] ECHR 53 9 Dec 1994 ECHR Human Rights Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (ratione personae); Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); No violation of P1-1; Violation of Art. 6-1; No violation of Art. 9; No violation of Art. 11; No violation of Art. 13; No violation of Art. 14+6; No violation of Art. 14+9; No violation of Art. 14+11; No violation of Art. 14+P1-1; Pecuniary damage - reserved; Costs and expenses award - Convention proceedings The Government of Greece argued that the applicant monasteries, which were challenging legislation which provided for the transfer of a large part of the monastic property to the Greek State, were not non-governmental organisations within the meaning of article 25 (now 34) of the Convention. It was pointed out that the monasteries were hierarchically integrated into the organic structure of the Greek Orthodox Church, that legal personality was attributed to the Church and its constituent parts in public law and that the Church and its institutions, which played a direct and active part in public administration, took administrative decisions whose lawfulness was subject to judicial review by the Supreme Administrative court like those of any other public authority. Rejecting this argument, the court said "Like the Commission in its admissibility decision, the Court notes at the outset that the applicant monasteries do not exercise governmental powers. Section 39(1) of the Charter of the Greek Church describes the monasteries as ascetic religious institutions. Their objectives - essentially ecclesiastical and spiritual ones, but also cultural and social ones in some cases - are not such as to enable them to be classed with governmental organisations established for public administration purposes. From the classification as public law entities it may be inferred only that the legislature - on account of the special links between the monasteries and the State - wished to afford them the same legal protection vis-à-vis third parties as was accorded to other public law entities. Furthermore, the monastery councils' only power consists in making rules concerning the organisation and furtherance of spiritual life and the internal administration of each monastery." 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Schouten and Meldrum -v- The Netherlands 48/1993/443522 49/1993/444/523; 19006/91; 19005/91 9 Dec 1994 ECHR Mr R. Ryssdal, President, Mr R. Bernhardt, Mr B. Walsh, Mr A. Spielmann, Mr S.K. Martens, Mr A.N. Loizou, Mr A.B. Baka, Mr P. Jambrek, Mr K. Jungwiert, and also of Mr H. Petzold, Acting Registrar Human Rights Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1; Pecuniary damage - claim rejected; Costs and expenses partial award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings The applicant had worked with three physiotherapists, and had been asked to pay their social security contributions. Although he was not their employer, the relationship was deemed by the national court to be the social equivalent of employment. He complained that his human rights had been infringed by the long delay in bringing the case to a conclusion. The local Appeal's tribunal considered that the delay had not prejudiced the applicant. The applicants asserted that the cases had not been dealt with within a reasonable time. The Netherlands government contended that the Convention rights did not apply to such proceedings. In this case the features were predominantly those of private law, and Article 6 applied. As to delay, that was calculated from the time when request for confirmation of the original decision was made. In each case extensions of time had been granted at the request of the applicants. The delays remained excessive given that interest was being charged at greater rates than could be obtained commercially. There had been no unfairness in the nature of the proceedings. European Convention on Human Rights Â Vereinigung Demokratischer Soldaten Osterreichs And Gubi -v- Austria [1994] ECHR 50; 15153/89; [1994] ECHR 50 19 Dec 1994 ECHR Human Rights Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 10; Violation of Art. 13 (first applicant); No violation of Art. 13 (second applicant); Not necessary to examine Art. 14+10; Pecuniary damage - claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage - finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses partial award - domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award - Convention proceedings [ Bailii ] - [ ECHR ] - [ Bailii ] Â
		Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.

swarb.co.uk - law index

Human Rights - From: 1994 To: 1994