McLeod v The United Kingdom: ECHR 23 Sep 1998

A Police Officer assisting in recovery of items ordered to be returned in matrimonial proceedings acted in excess of his powers and trespassed in entering house where there was no immediate threat of breach of the peace, and no sight of disorder. An interference with private life by the police must be objectively justified under Art 8.
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8; Not necessary to examine P1-1; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings


Times 01-Oct-1998, 72/1997/856/1065, 24755/94, [1998] ECHR 92, (1998) 27 EHRR 493, [1998] ECHR 92


Worldlii, Bailii


European Convention on Human Rights


Human Rights

Cited by:

CitedGiles, Regina (on the Application of) v Parole Board and Another HL 31-Jul-2003
The defendant had been sentenced for offences of violence, but an additional period was imposed to protect the public. He had been refused leave for reconsideration of that part of his sentence after he completed the normal segment of his sentence. . .
CitedKeegan v United Kingdom ECHR 18-Jul-2006
The claimant had been the subject of a raid by armed police on his home. The raid was a mistake. He complained that the English legal system, in rejecting his claim had not allowed him to assert that the police action had been disproportionate.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Police, Torts – Other

Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.165663