Search Results for: Terrorism Act 2006 5

Click the case name for better results:

Regina v Immigration Officer at Prague Airport and another, ex parte European Roma Rights Centre and others: HL 9 Dec 2004

Extension oh Human Rights Beyond Borders The appellants complained that the system set up by the respondent where Home Office officers were placed in Prague airport to pre-vet applicants for asylum from Romania were dsicriminatory in that substantially more gypsies were refused entry than others, and that it was contrary to the obligations of the … Continue reading Regina v Immigration Officer at Prague Airport and another, ex parte European Roma Rights Centre and others: HL 9 Dec 2004

A v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 16 Dec 2004

The applicants had been imprisoned and held without trial, being suspected of international terrorism. No criminal charges were intended to be brought. They were foreigners and free to return home if they wished, but feared for their lives if they did. A British subject, who was suspected in the exact same way, and there were … Continue reading A v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department: HL 16 Dec 2004

Pilecki v Circuit Court of Legnica, Poland: HL 6 Feb 2008

The defendant appealed against an extradition order made under a European Arrest Warrant to ensure that he served a sentence of imprisonment in Poland. The warrant was in respect of several sentences, some of which were for more and some for less than four months. The statement did not allow the court to differentiate between … Continue reading Pilecki v Circuit Court of Legnica, Poland: HL 6 Feb 2008

Al Rawi and Others v The Security Service and Others: CA 4 May 2010

Each claimant had been captured and mistreated by the US government, and claimed the involvement in and responsibility for that mistreatment by the respondents. The court was asked whether a court in England and Wales, in the absence of statutory authority, could order a closed material procedure for part or all of the trial of … Continue reading Al Rawi and Others v The Security Service and Others: CA 4 May 2010

Gentle, Regina (on the Application of) and Another v The Prime Minister and Another: HL 9 Apr 2008

The appellants were mothers of two servicemen who had died whilst on active service in Iraq. They appealed refusal to grant a public inquiry. There had already been coroners inquests. They said that Article 2 had been infringed. Held: The appeal was dismissed. The right to an inquiry was procedural and depended first on the … Continue reading Gentle, Regina (on the Application of) and Another v The Prime Minister and Another: HL 9 Apr 2008

Secretary of State for the Home Department v AF AM and AN etc: CA 17 Oct 2008

The claimants were subject to non-derogating control orders, being non EU nationals suspected of terrorism. They now said that they had not had a compatible hearing as to the issue of whether they were in fact involved in terrorist activity. Held: Applying MB, ‘it is wrong to say that a hearing of the critical issue … Continue reading Secretary of State for the Home Department v AF AM and AN etc: CA 17 Oct 2008

Norris v United States of America and others: HL 12 Mar 2008

The detainee appealed an order for extradition to the USA, saying that the offence (price-fixing) was not one known to English common law. The USA sought his extradition under the provisions of the Sherman Act. Held: It was not, and it would be wrong in principle to decide that it was: ‘The common law recognised … Continue reading Norris v United States of America and others: HL 12 Mar 2008

Brannigan and McBride v The United Kingdom: ECHR 26 May 1993

(Plenary) The applicants who had been detained without trial, challenged the derogation for the Convention by the respondent in respect of terrorist associated activity in Northern Ireland and on the mainland. Held: The derogation in respect of the suspension of rights of detained terrorist suspects was justified by and within the margin of appreciation allowed … Continue reading Brannigan and McBride v The United Kingdom: ECHR 26 May 1993

Corner House Research and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v The Serious Fraud Office: HL 30 Jul 2008

SFO Director’s decisions reviewable The director succeeded on his appeal against an order declaring unlawful his decision to discontinue investigations into allegations of bribery. The Attorney-General had supervisory duties as to the exercise of the duties by the Director. It had become clear that a continued investigation would threaten co-operation between the UK and Saudi … Continue reading Corner House Research and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v The Serious Fraud Office: HL 30 Jul 2008

Regina (Abbasi) v Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs: CA 6 Nov 2002

There is no authority in law to support the imposition of an enforceable duty on the state to protect the citizen, and although the court was able to intervene, in limited ways, in the way in which the Foreign and Commonwealth Office used its discretion whether to exercise its right to protect a citizen, the … Continue reading Regina (Abbasi) v Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs: CA 6 Nov 2002

Kahar, Regina v: CACD 17 May 2016

Prosecutors choice of charge is his not the courts The Court gave guidance on sentencing for offences under s5 of the 2006 Act. Held: It was not for the court to say that more specific offences could have been charged and should have been charged: ‘As a matter of constitutional principle, it is generally for … Continue reading Kahar, Regina v: CACD 17 May 2016

Regina v Director of Public Prosecutions, ex parte Kebilene and others: HL 28 Oct 1999

(Orse Kebeline) The DPP’s appeal succeeded. A decision by the DPP to authorise a prosecution could not be judicially reviewed unless dishonesty, bad faith, or some other exceptional circumstance could be shown. A suggestion that the offence for which a prosecution was authorised was framed so as to breach the accused’s human rights was to … Continue reading Regina v Director of Public Prosecutions, ex parte Kebilene and others: HL 28 Oct 1999

Miller, Regina (On the Application Of) v The Prime Minister: QBD 11 Sep 2019

Prorogation request was non-justiciable The claimant sought to challenge the prorogation of Parliament by the Queen at the request of the respondent. Held: The claim failed: ‘the decision of the Prime Minister to advise Her Majesty the Queen to prorogue Parliament is not justiciable in Her Majesty’s courts.’‘The Prime Minister’s decision that Parliament should be … Continue reading Miller, Regina (On the Application Of) v The Prime Minister: QBD 11 Sep 2019

Secretary of State for the Home Department v MB; Same v AF: HL 31 Oct 2007

Non-derogating control orders – HR Compliant MB and AF challenged non-derogating control orders made under the 2005 Act, saying that they were incompatible with their human rights. AF was subject to a curfew of 14 hours a day, wore an electronic tag at all times, could not leave a nine square mile area, and had … Continue reading Secretary of State for the Home Department v MB; Same v AF: HL 31 Oct 2007

Tan Te Lam v Superintendent of Tai A Chau Detention Centre: PC 27 Mar 1996

(Hong Kong) Migrants from Vietnam of Chinese ethnic origin had landed in Hong Kong by boat, and been refused refugee status. They were detained for several years under section 13D of the Immigration Ordinance ‘pending . . removal from Hong Kong’. However the Ordinance only permitted detention if the period of detention was ‘reasonable having … Continue reading Tan Te Lam v Superintendent of Tai A Chau Detention Centre: PC 27 Mar 1996

Padfield v Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food: HL 14 Feb 1968

Exercise of Ministerial Discretion The Minister had power to direct an investigation in respect of any complaint as to the operation of any marketing scheme for agricultural produce. Milk producers complained about the price paid by the milk marketing board for their milk when compared with prices paid to producers in other regions. The Minister … Continue reading Padfield v Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food: HL 14 Feb 1968

Malik v Manchester Crown Court and others; Re A: Admn 19 Jun 2008

The claimant was a journalist writing about terrorism. He had interviewed a man with past connections with Al-Qaeda, and he now objected to a production order for documents obtained by him in connecion with his writings. The court had acted on documents he had not seen. He said that a special advocate should have been … Continue reading Malik v Manchester Crown Court and others; Re A: Admn 19 Jun 2008

ex parte Guardian Newspapers Ltd: CACD 30 Sep 1998

The defendants purported to serve a notice under Rule 24A(1) of the Crown Court Rules 1982 of an intention to apply for a hearing in camera of their application that the trial be stopped as an abuse of process. Held: Where an application was to be made for a trial to be held in camera, … Continue reading ex parte Guardian Newspapers Ltd: CACD 30 Sep 1998

Raissi, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 14 Feb 2008

The claimant appealed against refusal of his request for judicial review of the defendant’s decision not to award him damages after his wrongful arrest and detention after he was wrongly suspected of involvement in terrorism. He had been discharged when, after several months, the court had been presented with no evidence of his involvement. He … Continue reading Raissi, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 14 Feb 2008

Elguzouli-Daf v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis and Another: CA 16 Nov 1994

The Court upheld decisions striking out actions for negligence brought by claimants who had been arrested and held in custody during criminal investigations which were later discontinued. The Crown Prosecution Service owes no general duty of care to a defendant in its conduct of a prosecution. The court must not confuse the immunity rule which … Continue reading Elguzouli-Daf v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis and Another: CA 16 Nov 1994

Tse Wai Chun Paul v Albert Cheng; 13 Nov 2000

References: [2001] EMLR 777, [2000] 3 HKLRD 418, [2000] HKCFA 35 Links: hklii Coram: Chief Justice Li, Mr Justice Bokhary PJ, Mr Justice Ribeiro PJ, Sir Denys Roberts NPJ and Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead NPJ (Court of Final Appeal of Hong Kong) For the purposes of the defence to defamation of fair comment: ‘The comment … Continue reading Tse Wai Chun Paul v Albert Cheng; 13 Nov 2000