Rowe and Davis v The United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Feb 2000

(Grand Chamber) Complaint as to non-disclosure of prosecution evidence.
Wildhaber P
[2000] ECHR 91
Bailii
European Convention on Human Rights 5 6.1
Citing:
Conjoined HearingJasper v The United Kingdom ECHR 16-Feb-2000
Grand Chamber – The defendants had been convicted after the prosecution had withheld evidence from them and from the judge under public interest immunity certificates. They complained that they had not had fair trials.
Held: The right was . .
Conjoined HearingFitt v United Kingdom ECHR 16-Feb-2000
(Grand Chamber) Complaint as to non-disclosure of prosecution evidence. . .

Cited by:
Conjoined HearingAmann v Switzerland ECHR 16-Feb-2000
(Grand Chamber) Complaint as to non-disclosure of prosecution evidence.
Held: The holding and use of the information in question had not been ‘in accordance with the law’, as required by article 8(2), because of the absence from the relevant . .
Conjoined HearingJasper v The United Kingdom ECHR 16-Feb-2000
Grand Chamber – The defendants had been convicted after the prosecution had withheld evidence from them and from the judge under public interest immunity certificates. They complained that they had not had fair trials.
Held: The right was . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 April 2021; Ref: scu.471640