Test for police protection need
The court considered the degree of risk to an individual which should give rise to a duty on the police to protect him under article 2.
Held: Lord Diplock said: ‘My Lords, bearing in mind the relative gravity of the consequences of the court’s expectation being falsified either in one way or in the other, I do not think that the test of the applicability of paragraph (c) is that the court must be satisfied that it is more likely than not that the fugitive will be detained or restricted if he is returned. A lesser degree of likelihood is, in my view, sufficient; and I would not quarrel with the way in which the test was stated by the magistrate or with the alternative way in which it was expressed by the Divisional Court. ‘A reasonable chance,’ ‘substantial grounds for thinking,’ ‘a serious possibility’ – I see no significant difference between these various ways of describing the degree of likelihood of the detention or restriction of the fugitive on his return which justifies the court in giving effect to the provisions of section 4(1)(c). Instead of too close a calculation, the court should consider the words ‘applying, untrammelled by semantics, principles of common sense and common humanity.’
 1 WLR 987,  2 All ER 691
European Convention on Human Rights, Fugitive Offenders Act 1967 4(1)(c)
England and Wales
Cited – Regina (A and Others) v Lord Saville of Newdigate and Others QBD 16-Nov-2001
When making a decision which would interfere with the human rights of an individual, and even where the risks from which protections was sought, could be seen as small, it was the duty of the decision maker to justify the interference. The . .
Adopted – Regina (A and others) (Widgery Soldiers) v Lord Saville of Newdigate and Others CA 19-Dec-2001
The court would apply common sense in deciding whether soldier witnesses should be obliged to attend in person at an enquiry in Londonderry, where they claimed their lives would be at risk. It was not appropriate to seek to define what would be . .
Cited – Regina v Chief Constable of Norfolk, ex parte DF Admn 2002
Test for need for police protection
The court considered the duties of the police to protect the applicants.
Held: The search for a phrase which encapsulates a threshold of risk which engages article 2 is a search for a chimera. The degree of risk described as ‘real and . .
Cited – A and Others, Regina (on the Application of) v Lord Saville of Newdigate and others CA 28-Jul-1999
Former soldiers who had been involved in the events in Londonderry in 1972, and were to be called to give evidence before a tribunal of inquiry, still had cause to fear from their names being given, and so were entitled to anonymity when giving such . .
Cited – A and Another v Inner South London Coroner QBD 24-Jun-2004
At an inquest into the death of a civilian apparently shot by police officers, the officers applied for anonymity, which the coroner refused. They sought judicial review.
Held: How witnesses participated in coroners inquests was to be decided . .
Cited – Secretary of State for Home Department v Ravichandran CA 6-Jun-1997
Application for leave to appeal granted.
Held: This was a case where the relationship of the Tribunal to the Special Adjudicator can and should be considered. ‘I have indicated some of the difficulties which may arise. There is no doubt that . .
Cited – Bennett v Officers A and B and Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis CA 2-Nov-2004
Police Officers had been involved in a shooting in which a man died. They were granted anonymity before the coroner’s court, on evidence suggesting they might be at risk. The family of the deceased appealed.
Held: The coroner misdirected . .
Cited – Van Colle v Hertfordshire Police QBD 10-Mar-2006
The claimants claimed for the estate of their murdered son. He had been waiting to give evidence in a criminal trial, and had asked the police for support having received threats. Other witnesses had also suffered intimidation including acts of . .
Approved – Regina v Home Secretary, ex parte Sivakumaran HL 16-Dec-1987
The House of Lords were concerned with the correct test to be applied in determining whether asylum seekers are entitled to the status of refugee. That in turn gave rise to an issue, turning upon the proper interpretation of Article 1.A(2) of the . .
Cited – Regina v Makuwa CACD 23-Feb-2006
The defendant appealed her conviction for using a false instrument (a passport) intending someone else to accept it as genuine.
Held: Once she had brought forward sufficient evidence to support a claim to asylum status, it was then for the . .
Cited – Medical Justice, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department Admn 26-Jul-2010
The claimant, a charity assisting immigrants and asylum seekers, challenged a policy document regulating the access to the court of failed applicants facing removal. They said that the new policy, reducing the opportunity to appeal to 72 hours or . .
These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 May 2021; Ref: scu.183661