The Commission challenged the compatibility of the NI law relating to banning nearly all abortions with Human Rights Law. It now challenged a decision that it did not have standing to bring the case.
Held: (Lady Hale, Lord Kerr and Lord Wilson . .
The Commission challenged the compatibility of the NI law relating to banning nearly all abortions with Human Rights Law. It now challenged a decision that it did not have standing to bring the case.
Citations: 28940/95,  ECHR 554 Links: Bailii Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights 5(1) Jurisdiction: Human Rights Cited by: Cited – Austin and Another v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis HL 28-Jan-2009 Movement retsriction was not Liberty Deprivation The claimants had been present during a demonstration policed by the respondent. They appealed against dismissal … Continue reading Foka v Turkey: ECHR 24 Jun 2008
Evidence from 3rd Party Torture Inadmissible The applicants had been detained following the issue of certificates issued by the respondent that they posed a terrorist threat. They challenged the decisions of the Special Immigration Appeals Commission saying that evidence underlying the decisions had probably been obtained by torture committed by foreign powers, and should not … Continue reading A and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department (No 2): HL 8 Dec 2005
The Commission had regard to the fact that the purpose for which the children were taken to the police headquarters and kept there for about two hours was to question them, not to arrest or detain them. This led to the conclusion that the action in question did not constitute a deprivation of liberty in … Continue reading X v Germany: ECHR 19 Mar 1981
Article 5(1) may apply to deprivations of liberty of even a very short duration. Citations:  ECHR 426, 65755/01 Links: Bailii Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights 5(1) Cited by: Cited – Austin and Another v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis HL 28-Jan-2009 Movement retsriction was not Liberty Deprivation The claimants had been present … Continue reading Stefanov v Bulgaria: ECHR 22 May 2008
The claimants had variously been attending a demonstration in London, or passing through. The police detained them in a cordon for several hours. They sought damages. No unlawful acts were alleged against them. Held: There was no deprivation of liberty during the initial period when the cordon was not absolute and people were free to … Continue reading Austin and Another v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis: QBD 23 Mar 2005
‘These two appeals arise out of actions for damages brought against the United Kingdom government by detainees, alleging unlawful detention and maltreatment by British forces. They are two of several hundred actions in which similar claims are made. In both cases, the claim is based in part on article 5(1) of the European Convention on … Continue reading Al-Waheed v Ministry of Defence: SC 17 Jan 2017
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 5-1; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedingsA conclusion that a mental disorder is of such a kind or degree as to warrant compulsory confinement can only be justified if other, less severe measures, have … Continue reading Witold Litwa v Poland: ECHR 4 Apr 2000
The applicant, a minor, complained about his committal to a child psychiatric ward of a state hospital at his mother’s request. The question was whether this was a deprivation of his liberty in violation of article 5. The applicant said that it was, as the ward in which he was placed was a closed ward, … Continue reading Nielsen v Denmark: ECHR 28 Nov 1988
‘The issue in this case is whether, in order for the United Kingdom to avoid being in breach of Article 5(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights (‘the Convention’), it is necessary for a welfare order to be made by the Court of Protection (‘the CoP’) pursuant to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (‘the … Continue reading Secretary of State for Justice v Staffordshire County Council and Another: CA 22 Dec 2016
Appeal by the Secretary of State from an order declaring that the detention of the claimant for a period of 11 days following the expiry of the custodial element of a sentence imposed upon him in the Crown Court was a breach of his rights protected by Article 5(1) of European Convention on Human Rights … Continue reading Brooks, Regina (on The Application of) v The Independent Adjudicator and Another: CA 28 Oct 2016
The court was asked whether proceedings in a military court against soldiers for disciplinary offences involved criminal charges within the meaning of Article 6(1): ‘In this connection, it is first necessary to know whether the provision(s) defining the offence charged belong, according to the legal system of the respondent State, to criminal law, disciplinary law … Continue reading Engel And Others v The Netherlands (1): ECHR 8 Jun 1976
Movement retsriction was not Liberty Deprivation The claimants had been present during a demonstration policed by the respondent. They appealed against dismissal of their claims for false imprisonment having been prevented from leaving Oxford Circus for over seven hours. The claimants appealed against rejection of their claims on human rights law. Held: The appeal failed. … Continue reading Austin and Another v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis: HL 28 Jan 2009
The claimant had been sentenced to a term greater than allowed by law, and served more time than the maximum allowed. He now sought damages. McGowan J  EWHC 1477 (QB) Bailii Human Rights Act 1998 6(1) 7(1)(a), European Convention on Human Rights 5(1)(a) England and Wales Prisons, Human Rights Updated: 30 December 2021; Ref: … Continue reading Wright v Lord Chancellor: QBD 21 May 2015
Application for a declaration that it is lawful and in the best interests of M to be deprived of his liberty whilst an inpatient of the Trust, and for his conveyance to and from Trust premises. The application was made as M has the right to liberty and cannot be deprived of his liberty save … Continue reading Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust v M (by his Children’s Guardian) and Others: FD 2 Jul 2021
The claimant had obtained British citizenship, but had had it removed by the appellant by an order under the 1981 Act after he came to be suspected of terrorist involvement. He had appealed against the order, eventually succeeding on the basis that he had, by virtue of the order, been made stateless. The Secretary of … Continue reading Secretary of State for The Home Department v Al-Jedda: SC 9 Oct 2013
The Court was asked as to the recall to prison of a prisoner who had been released on licence. His recall and subsequent detention were considered by the Board, but under the system then in place it could only make a non-binding recommendation. Recommendations for release had not been acted upon. When the applicant was … Continue reading Weeks v The United Kingdom: ECHR 5 Oct 1988
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
Article 5-1-b Non-compliance with court order Deprivation of liberty to enforce fine that had already been paid: violation Facts – In 2000 the applicant was convicted of a minor offence and ordered to pay a fine within fifteen days of the judgment becoming final. He was informed that if he did not pay in time … Continue reading Velinov v ‘The Former Yugoslav Republic Of Macedonia’: ECHR 19 Sep 2013
The applicant had been sentenced to an indefinite term for public protection, but the determinate part of his sentence had passed with no consideration as to whether his continued detention was required. Held: The post tariff detention was not unlawful and therefore no action for damages lay. The clear failures of the respondent to implement … Continue reading Secretary of State for Justice v James: HL 6 May 2009
Challenge to the rule change introduced by the Parole Board Rules 2019 granting a prisoner or the Secretary of State a 21-day period to apply for an administrative review of a Parole Board decision. The Appellant submits that the Reconsideration . .
It was a breach of Article 5 where the judicial power was exercised by a District Attorney whose impartiality was ‘capable of appearing open to doubt’ by reason of his entitlement to intervene in the subsequent criminal proceedings as a . .
(Grand Chamber) When considering the appropriateness of a deportation order to a country with which the deporting country had a memorandum of understanding that the destination country would not torture the deportee, a court must look beyond the . .
(Grand Chamber) The applicant sought judicial review of the decision to detain him for a short period while his asylum claim was being subject to fast-track processing. The decision was made pursuant to a policy under which all asylum claimants . .
The Court considered the procedures when a prisoner is kept in solitary confinement, otherwise described as ‘segregation’ or ‘removal from association’, and principally whether decisions to keep the appellants in segregation for substantial periods were taken lawfully. Held: The segregation was not authorised by the applicable legislation: ‘rule 45 . . (1) enables the governor … Continue reading Bourgass and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: SC 29 Jul 2015
Appeal against a decision that the SS’s refusal of a student loan was a breach of the claimant’s human rights. Held: The Secretary of State’s appeal against the judge’s decision on the settlement criterion was allowed and the appellant’s appeal against his decision on the lawful ordinary residence criterion was dismissed.Laws LJ (with whom Floyd … Continue reading Tigere, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills: CA 31 Jul 2014
The applicant was registered on a German database as a person prepared to use violence in the context of sports events. He travelled with a group of others from Bremen to Frankfurt in order to attend a football match. They were kept under police surveillance. Some (not the applicant) were searched and found to be … Continue reading Ostendorf v Germany: ECHR 7 Mar 2013
The several applicants had been arrested in different circumstances and each charged with breach of the peace contrary to common law. Under the Magistrates’ Court Act 1980, the court can bind over a Defendant to keep the peace, if the Defendant consents, and impose a sentence of up to 6 months’ imprisonment if the Defendant … Continue reading Steel and Others v The United Kingdom: ECHR 23 Sep 1998
Police officers appealed against refusal of orders protecting their anonymity when called to appear before the Robert Hamill Inquiry. Held: ‘The tribunal accordingly approached the matter properly under article 2 in seeking to ascertain whether giving evidence would give rise to a materially increased risk to life. Having found that it did not, it did … Continue reading In re Officer L: HL 31 Jul 2007
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. He wanted a consideration which would parallel the new won rights of review for … Continue reading Giles, Regina (on the Application of) v Parole Board and Another: HL 31 Jul 2003
The court rejected a challenge to the Home Secretary’s decision to substitute a period of 18 months for the 9 months recommended by the Parole Board to be passed in open conditions before the prisoner’s next review. ‘[The right not to be detained arbitrarily] can be breached as a matter of law if the Home … Continue reading Spence, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 23 May 2003
1. During the proceedings before the Community Courts internal Commission documents are not to be communicated to the applicants, unless the circumstances of the case are exceptional and the applicants make out a plausible case for the need to do so. That is the case as regards the expert accountant’s report, whose purpose, as a … Continue reading HFB and others v Commission: ECFI 20 Mar 2002
The claimant was a prisoner. He became entitled to be considered for release on parole, but was not released because the Parole Board had not made a decision. Held: The system for consideration of the release of discretionary and life prisoners infringed the human rights of such prisoners, insofar as the consideration of their release … Continue reading Regina (Noorkoiv) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Another: CA 30 May 2002
Parties challenged the compliance of proceedings with the convention where there had been considerable delay. Held: The reasonable detention provision (article 5(3)) and the reasonable time requirement (article 6(1)) conferred free-standing rights, which could be broken notwithstanding absence of effect on the fairness of the trial. The threshold for delay was high, but once established … Continue reading Dyer v Watson and Burrows: PC 29 Jan 2002
The Court limited itself to article 5(1)(e), when it stated that: ‘the notion of ‘lawfulness’ in the context of article 5(1)(e) of the Convention might have a broader meaning than in national legislation. Lawfulness of detention necessarily presumes a ‘fair and proper procedure’, including the requirement ‘that any measure depriving a person of his liberty … Continue reading Zagidulina v Russia: ECHR 2 May 2013
Mr Johnson awaited trial for crimes of violence. He was diagnosed mentally ill, and on conviction made subject to a hospital order, and restricted without limit of time. He made progress, but was not discharged or re-classified. At a fourth tribunal hearing in June 1989 the opinion was that he was no longer suffering from … Continue reading Johnson v The United Kingdom: ECHR 24 Oct 1997
The court considered the required basis for a reasonable suspicion to found an arrest without a warrant: ‘The ‘reasonableness’ of the suspicion on which an arrest must be based forms an essential part of the safeguard against arbitrary arrest and detention which is laid down in Article 5(1)(c). The court agrees with the Commission and … Continue reading Fox, Campbell and Hartley v The United Kingdom: ECHR 30 Aug 1990
The applicants had been detained under Belgian vagrancy laws. An earlier decision had found that their rights had been infringed because of the lack of effective means for them to challenge their detention. The Belgian government said that the applicants had not exhausted their national remedies. Held: The complaints were admissible. Later changes in Belgian … Continue reading In re De Wilde, Ooms and Versyp v Belgium (No 1): ECHR 18 Nov 1970
The claimant prisoner complained of the delay in his release, awaiting a review. Domestic court proceedings had lasted two and a half months at first instance and a further three months on appeal. The proceedings had been brought by the public prosecutor to obtain an extension of the period during which the applicant, who had … Continue reading Rutten v The Netherlands: ECHR 24 Jul 2001
Two foreign nationals with leave to remain in this country committed serious crimes. The Secretary of State ordered their deportation. Held: Where the deportation of a foreigner following a conviction here, would conflict with his human rights, the court had to assess whether the, first, the objective could be achieved by some alternative, less interfering, … Continue reading Samaroo and Sezek v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 17 Jul 2001
The applicant sought review of a decision to remove him from a witness protection scheme within the prison. He claimed that having been promised protection, he had a legitimate expectation of protection, having been told he would receive protection while he was in prison. He had not eventually been relied upon as a witness. Held: … Continue reading Bloggs 61, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department: CA 18 Jun 2003
Canlii (Supreme Court of Canada) Constitutional law – Charter of Rights – Life, liberty and security of the person – Fundamental justice – Terminally ill patient seeking assistance to commit suicide – Whether Criminal Code provision prohibiting aiding a person to commit suicide infringes s. 7 of Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms – If … Continue reading Rodriguez v Attorney General of Canada: 30 Sep 1993
ECHR Judgment (Just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient 2832/66; 2835/66; 2899/66 Hudoc Preliminary objection partially allowed (non-exhaustion); Violation of Art. 5-4; Just satisfaction reserved 2832/66; 2835/66; 2899/66The possibility of a detainee being heard either in person or, where necessary, through some form of … Continue reading De Wilde, Ooms and Versyp v Belgium: ECHR 18 Jun 1971
The claimant was detained in a secure Mental Hospital. He complained at the seclusions policy applied by the hospital, saying that it departed from the Guidance issued for such policies by the Secretary of State under the Act. Held: The House allowed the Hospital’s appeal. The policy was lawful. Seclusion was to be seen as … Continue reading Regina v Ashworth Hospital Authority (Now Mersey Care National Health Service Trust) ex parte Munjaz: HL 13 Oct 2005
The claimant challenged the lawfulness of his detention between 15 January and 4 March 2021 (‘the unlawful detention challenge’). He was arrested on 15 January 2021 on the basis that he was unlawfully at large and returned to prison to serve the remainder of the determinate sentence imposed by Southwark Crown Court on 9 February … Continue reading Kessie-Adjei, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: Admn 30 Mar 2022
An order providing that a child should stay in secure accommodation, was an order which restricted the child’s liberty. A justification for such a restriction had to be brought within the exceptions listed in article 5. Held: Detention for educational supervision was permitted, and such supervision was not restricted to education in the sense of … Continue reading In Re K (A Child) (Secure Accommodation Order: Right to Liberty): CA 29 Nov 2000
The applicants had each entered the UK with a view to seeking asylum, but having failed to seek asylum immediately, they had been refused any assistance, were not allowed to work and so had been left destitute. Each had claimed asylum on the day following their arrival. Held: The appeal by the Secretary of State … Continue reading Adam, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Limbuela v Same; Tesema v Same: HL 3 Nov 2005
ECJ (Judgment) Reference for a preliminary ruling – Urgent preliminary ruling procedure – Judicial cooperation in criminal matters – Directive 2016/343/EU – Articles 3 and 6 – Temporal application – Review by the courts of the remand in custody pending trial of an accused – National legislation prohibiting, during the trial stage of the proceedings, … Continue reading Milev C-439/16: ECJ 27 Oct 2016
The right of access to the courts is not absolute but may be subject to limitations. These are permitted by implication since the right of access ‘by its very nature calls for regulation by the State, regulation which may vary in time and place according to the needs and resources of the community and of … Continue reading Ashingdane v The United Kingdom: ECHR 28 May 1985
Grand Chamber – The applicants complained that their restriction within a police cordon (a measure known as ‘kettling’) for up to seven hours during the course of a demonstration in central London amounted to a deprivation of their liberty in breach of Article 5-1 of the Convention. Held: Public order containment for several hours did … Continue reading Austin and Others v The United Kingdom: ECHR 15 Mar 2012
The claimant appealed against rejection of his claim for damages for false imprisonment and infringement of his human rights. On his arrest for a different offence his passport was suspected to be counterfeit, and he was then held for an offence under the 2006 Act. The police secured expert evidence from the National Document Fraud … Continue reading Zenati v Police of The Metropolis and Another: CA 11 Feb 2015
The claimant had been sentenced to 18 years imprisonment. He challenged the differing treatment for parole purposes of those sentenced to more than 15 years, as infringing his human rights, insofar as the decision was retained by the Home Secretary. Held: The decision itself was clearly not irrational. As to the involvement of the Home … Continue reading Regina on the Application of Clift v Secretary of State for the Home Department: Admn 13 Jun 2003
A Dutch national detained in hospital complained that his detention had divested him of his capacity to administer his property, and thus there had been determination of his civil rights and obligations without the guarantee of a judicial procedure. Held: Article 5(1)(a) is concerned with the question whether the detention is permissible. Its object and … Continue reading Winterwerp v The Netherlands: ECHR 24 Oct 1979
Appeals were brought complaining as to the apparent reversal of the burden of proof in road traffic cases and in cases under the Terrorism Acts. Was a legal or an evidential burden placed on a defendant? Held: Lord Bingham of Cornhill said: ‘The overriding concern is that a trial should be fair, and the presumption … Continue reading Sheldrake v Director of Public Prosecutions; Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002: HL 14 Oct 2004
The claimant had been sentenced to a short period of imprisonment but with an indeterminate term until he demonstrated that it was no longer necessary for the protection of the public. He complained that the term having expired, no opportunity had been given to him to show that he could be released. Held: ‘The legality … Continue reading Secretary of State for Justice v Walker; Same v James: CA 1 Feb 2008
The UK lodged a derogation with the Court as regards its human rights obligations in Northern Ireland because of the need to control terroist activity. The Government of Ireland intervened. From August 1971 until December 1975 the UK authorities exercised a series of ‘extrajudicial’ powers of arrest, detention and internment in Northern Ireland. The case … Continue reading The Republic of Ireland v The United Kingdom: ECHR 18 Jan 1978
The applicant sought judicial review of the respondent’s grant of planning permission for a development which would affect her. The authority objected that the application was made after three months after their decision, and so leave should not be granted, and also that her application for leave having been refused, there was no jurisdiction in … Continue reading Regina v London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham And Others, ex parte Burkett and Another: HL 23 May 2002
The applicants had each been given a life sentence, but having served the minimum term had been due to have the continued detention reviewed to establish whether or not continued detention was necessary for the protection of the pblic. It had not been, and each had claimed there was no basis for his continued detention, … Continue reading Faulkner, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and Another: SC 1 May 2013
Human Rights Law does ot extend visa rights ECJ Judgment – Reference for a preliminary ruling – Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 – Article 25(1)(a) – Visa with limited territorial validity – Issuing of a visa on humanitarian grounds or because of international obligations – Concept of ‘international obligations’ – Charter of Fundamental Rights of the … Continue reading X and X v Etat belge: ECJ 7 Mar 2017
The court was asked: ‘If a criminal who previously had leave to remain in this country is liable to deportation because of his offences, but cannot actually be deported because to remove him would infringe his rights under the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, with the result that the … Continue reading George, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 14 Mar 2014
(Court of Protection) The court was asked whether, if P could be found to lack mental capacity where he should live, where there was an essential conflict between representatives of the State who owe statutory duties to P on the one hand, and the view of his carer of 18-plus years standing on the other, … Continue reading A Primary Care Trust v P and Others: Misc 21 Dec 2009
The applicants, incarcerated at Long Lartin pending extradition or deportation, challenged a decision further restricting their movements within the prison. All were unconvicted, and all but one were suspected of terrorist crimes. The changes were made in response to the transfer to the unit of one particular prisoner. Held: Despite the changes given in the … Continue reading Bary and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and Another: Admn 19 Mar 2010
The claimant, having been released from prison on licence, objected to the procedure whereby his licence was revoked with no means for him to challenge that decision. Held: The appeal was dismissed. Article 5(4) did not apply to the particular circumstances. Neuberger L formulated a broader principle that where a person is lawfully sentenced to … Continue reading Whiston, Regina (on The Application of): SC 2 Jul 2014
The court was asked whether the duty under article 5 to provide prisoners with a real opportunity for rehabilitation applied to prisoners serving extended sentences. The prisoner was subject to an extended sentence, but had been released on licence and, after a breach, recalled. Having served the full original sentence, he now complained that the … Continue reading Brown v The Parole Board for Scotland, The Scottish Ministers and Another: SC 1 Nov 2017
The appellant complained that the system for considering the release of a life prisoner did not comply with the Convention when the decision was made by the Secretary of State and not by the Parole Board, or the court. The Board had recommended his release, but that had been overriden by the respondent. had not … Continue reading Black, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice: HL 21 Jan 2009
The applicants sought asylum, and, saying that they were children under eighteen, sought also the assistance of the local authority. Social workers judged them to be over eighteen and assistance was declined. Held: The claimants’ appeals succeeded. The actual age of a party is an objective question of fact, and as such was for the … Continue reading A, Regina (on the Application of) v London Borough of Croydon: SC 26 Nov 2009
The claimants had been employed by a local authority and then transferred to the respondents. They had had the benefit that their terms of employment were subject to collective agreement. The respondent was not part of the negotiation of later . .
(Scotland) The power to detain a person suffering from a mental illness, in order to ensure the safety of the public, and even though there was no real possibility of treatment of the mental condition in hospital, was not a disproportionate . .
The court considered a challenge to the rules governing ‘out of country’ appeals against immigration decisions. They had in each case convictions leading to prison terms for serious drugs related offences.
Held: The appeals were allowed, and . .
The court considered the standard of proof required before the Commissioners when considering the application of penalties.
Held: When challenging the assessment of a penalty on a taxpayer, there was no reason why the normal civil standard of . .
The appellate sought judicial review to challenge an order for his return to Albania. He said that he would be subject to persecution from communist sympathizers, and his life was at risk for a blood feud. Adjudicators had variously accepted and . .
ECHR Article 5-1
Deprivation of liberty
Failure to provide the rehabilitative courses to prisoners which were necessary for their release: violation
Facts – By virtue of section 225 of the . .
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 3; Violation of Art. 5-1; Violation of Art. 5-4; Pecuniary damage – claim rejected; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award; Costs and expenses . .
The defendant faced trial on allegations of acts in preparation of terrorism. He wanted to say that he had been encouraged by security officers and argued that he English law as to entrapment was incompatible with his human rights, and now sought . .
A jury had found, under section 4(5) of the 1964 Act as amended, that the defendant was unfit to plead. The court considered section 5 of the 1964 Act.
Held: A judge of the Crown Court is obliged under the section to make a mandatory order . .
References:  7 WWR 641,  3 SCR 519, (1993) 24 CR (4th) 281, (1993) 82 BCLR (2d) 273, (1993) 85 CCC (3d) 15, (1993) 17 CRR (2d) 193,  2 LRC 136, (1993) 107 DLR (4th) 342 Links: Canlii Canlii (Supreme Court of Canada) Constitutional law – Charter of Rights – Life, liberty and … Continue reading Rodriguez v Attorney General of Canada; 30 Sep 1993