Magee v The United Kingdom: ECHR 6 Jun 2000

Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1+6-3-c; No violation of Art. 14+6; Pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings
The applicant, who had been arrested in Northern Ireland and denied access to a solicitor for over 48 hours, complained of a violation by the UK of article 14 taken in conjunction with article 6. He alleged that, had he been arrested in England and Wales, he would have been granted access to a solicitor at once.
Held: The court rejected the complaint; it held at para 50 that the basis for the alleged difference of treatment was that, at the time of his arrest, the applicant had been present in Northern Ireland rather than in England and Wales and that, in that such a basis was not related to any personal characteristic, it was not a ground falling within article 14.

Citations:

[2000] ECHR 215, 28135/95, (2001) 31 EHRR 35, 31 EHRR 35, 8 BHRC 646, [2000] Crim LR 681, [2000] Po LR 188

Links:

Worldlii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 6 14

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

CitedMagee v United Kingdom ECHR 6-Jun-2000
The denial of access to a solicitor for a suspect before interrogation was a breach of the right to a fair hearing. The breach was so fundamental as to irretrievably prejudice the rights of a defendant. The article might be expressed to refer to . .
CitedA and B, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Health SC 14-Jun-2017
The court was asked: ‘Was it unlawful for the Secretary of State for Health, the respondent, who had power to make provisions for the functioning of the National Health Service in England, to have failed to make a provision which would have enabled . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 13 August 2022; Ref: scu.165883