The release date for a prisoner was calculated correctly according to guidance issued by the Home Office, but case law required the guidance to be altered, and the prisoner had been detained too long. The tort of false imprisonment is one of strict liability, and the governor was liable in damages even though he had … Continue reading Regina v Governor of Her Majesty’s Prison Brockhill ex parte Evans (No 2): HL 27 Jul 2000
A deportation order, made against a Tunisian, was eventually quashed by the French Administrative Court and the Article 6 complaints related to the length of time taken in the proceedings. The Court’s reasoning why Article 6 does not apply to procedures for the expulsion of aliens was: ‘the decision whether or not to authorise an … Continue reading Maaouia v France: ECHR 5 Oct 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 breached insofar as the prosecution had themselves sought to make that assessment without judicial involvement. Disclosure at … Continue reading Jasper v The United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Feb 2000
An intention to promote terrorist activity was sufficient to found an order for deportation even though the terrorism may not be directed at any person or property in the UK. Such activity is capable of constituting a threat to national security. The concept of national security is a protean one, and any activity which could … Continue reading The Secretary Of State For The Home Department v Shafiq Ur Rehman: CA 23 May 2000
Where the applicant for asylum could show that members of his family had been killed or persecuted by the authorities, the level of proof required that he would be under threat was not the normal civil standard of proof, but that of a reasonable degree of likelihood of persecution, and not the usual civil balance … Continue reading Nalliah Karanakaran v Secretary of State For The Home Department: CA 25 Jan 2000
The local authority had refused to renew a private hire vehicle licence. That refusal was successfully challenged, and the magistrates had awarded costs on the basis that they should follow the event. The authority appealed. Held: The discretion given to magistrates to award such costs as it feels are just and reasonable does not mean … Continue reading Bradford City Metropolitan District Council v Booth: QBD 10 May 2000
Federal Court of Australia – MIGRATION – refugees – application for protection visa – whether serious reasons for considering commission of serious non-political crime outside country of refuge – application of Art 1F(b) of Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees – meaning of ‘serious reasons for considering’. Judges: Weinberg J Citations:  FCA 1889, … Continue reading Arquita v Minister for Immigration and Multi-cultural Affairs: 22 Dec 2000
The applicant was convicted of intentionally importing cocaine and he complained that the burden of proof had been reversed by imposing on him an obligation, which he found impossible to discharge, to prove that he was not and could not have been aware that persons unknown to him had hidden a significant quantity of the … Continue reading Porras v Netherlands: ECHR 18 Jan 2000
(Court of Final Appeal of Hong Kong) For the purposes of the defence to defamation of fair comment: ‘The comment must explicitly or implicitly indicate, at least in general terms, what are the facts on which the comment is being made. The reader or hearer should be in a position to judge for himself how … Continue reading Tse Wai Chun Paul v Albert Cheng: 13 Nov 2000
Each defendant was charged under a statute which provided a defence if they could prove a certain element. They complained that this was a breach of their human rights. The complaint was rejected. It would be wrong to impose a burden of proof on a defendant as regards a main element of a crime, but … Continue reading Regina v Lambert; Regina v Ali; Regina v Jordan: CACD 14 Sep 2000
Prosecution to prove absence of genuine belief To convict a defendant under the 1960 Act, the prosecution had the burden of proving the absence of a genuine belief in the defendant’s mind that the victim was 14 or over. The Act itself said nothing about any mental element, so the assumption must be that mens … Continue reading B (A Minor) v Director of Public Prosecutions: HL 23 Feb 2000
Police Entrapment is no defence to Criminal Act The defendant complained of his conviction for supplying controlled drugs, saying that the undercover police officer had requested him to make the supply. Held: It was an abuse of process for the police to go so far as to incite a crime. Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead said: … Continue reading Regina v Looseley (orse Loosely); Attorney General’s Reference No 3 of 2000: HL 25 Oct 2001
The victim died on a farm when his dumper truck overturned burying him in its load. Held: The prosecutor needed to establish a prima facie case that the results required by the Act had not been achieved. He need only establish that a risk of injury arose out of the state of affairs at the … Continue reading Chargot Limited (T/A Contract Services) and Others, Regina v: HL 10 Dec 2008
Hudoc The claimants challenged anti-terrorist legislation introduced by the respondent. They complained that it violated the article 6(1) right of the applicants to remain silent and not incriminate themselves, . .
References:  FCA 1889, 106 FCR 46 Links: Austlii Coram: Weinberg J Federal Court of Australia – MIGRATION – refugees – application for protection visa – whether serious reasons for considering commission of serious non-political crime outside country of refuge – application of Art 1F(b) of Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees – meaning … Continue reading Arquita v Minister for Immigration and Multi-cultural Affairs; 22 Dec 2000
References:  EMLR 777,  3 HKLRD 418,  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
1267 – 1278 – 1285 – 1297 – 1361 – 1449 – 1491 – 1533 – 1677 – 1688 – 1689 – 1700 – 1706 – 1710 – 1730 – 1737 – 1738 – 1751 – 1774 – 1792 – 1793 – 1804 – 1814 – 1819 – 1824 – 1828 – 1831 – 1832 … Continue reading Acts
ICO The complainant requested information relating to Authorisations for stop and search powers under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000. The public authority withheld the information on the basis of the . .
The claimant challenged the compatibility of section 41 of the 2000 Act with article 5. The section allowed for longer periods of detention by police on application to the Magistrates. Citations: 29891/12 – HECOM,  ECHR 1970 Links: Bailii Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights 5, Terrorism Act 2000 41(3) Jurisdiction: Human Rights Human Rights, … Continue reading Magee v The United Kingdom: ECHR 7 Nov 2012
The defendant appealed against his conviction for possessing an article for a purpose connected with terrorism and making a record of information likely to be useful in terrorism. He now appealed against the latter conviction. He had been found to have very large quantities of such electronic materials. Held: The appeal failed. The definition of … Continue reading Muhammed v Regina: CACD 19 Feb 2010
(Admissibility and Summary) Citations:  ECHR 755, 4158/05 Links: Bailii Statutes: Terrorism Act 2000 44, European Convention on Human Rights 5 8 10 Jurisdiction: Human Rights Citing: At First Instance – Gillan and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis and Another Admn 31-Oct-2003 The applicants challenged by … Continue reading Gillan and Quinton v The United Kingdom: ECHR 12 May 2009
The applicant challenged the terms of a non-derogating control order. It was anticipated that unless prevented, he would fight against UK forces in Iraq. Held: The section allowed the Secretary of State to impose any necessary conditions, but subject to a system of supervision by the courts. The parties now disputed whether the Act gave … Continue reading MB, Re, Secretary of State for the Home Department v MB: Admn 12 Apr 2006
The complainant requested from the Chief Constable of Sussex Police (‘Sussex Police’) information relating to Sussex Police’s implementation of schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000. By the date of this notice Sussex Police had not provided a substantive response to this request. The Commissioner’s decision is that Sussex Police has failed to respond to … Continue reading Sussex Police (Police and Criminal Justice): ICO 15 Feb 2021
The defendants were to be tried for allegedly sending funds abroad to support terrorism. The court now considered the meaning of the phrase ‘reasonable cause to suspect’ in the context of the anticipated use of the funds: ‘Does it mean that the accused must actually suspect, and for reasonable cause, that the money may be … Continue reading Lane and Another, Regina v: SC 11 Jul 2018
‘This case concerns the exercise of the extensive powers under Schedule 7 to the Terrorism Act 2000 and the detention of material in the possession of a person assisting a journalist and possibly identifying journalistic sources. The protection of journalistic sources has been stated to be of vital importance to press freedom, both in our … Continue reading Miranda, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Another: Admn 23 Aug 2013
The court asked whether the conviction of a co-defendant was correctly admitted as evidence against her co-accused, and if not what was the effect on the fairness of the trial. Held: The plea of the co-defendant should not have been admitted. The issue at this trial was as to matters on which the first trial … Continue reading Girma and Others, Regina v (Rev 1): CACD 15 May 2009
Appeal by defendant in terrorist trial against ruling at preparatory hearing that he had no reasonable excuse defence. Citations:  EWCA Crim 922 Links: Bailii Statutes: Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996, Terrorism Act 2000 58, Terrorism Act 2006 51 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Cited by: Appeal from – Regina v G; Regina v J … Continue reading G v Regina: CACD 29 Apr 2008
The defendants sought to appeal against their sentences for withholding information about terrorism. Held: The factor determing the sentence was not principally the extent of the information which might have been provided, but rather the seriousness of the terrorist activity. Time which had been spent awaiting trial subject to a curfew enforced by means of … Continue reading Sherif and Others, Regina v: CACD 21 Nov 2008
The Commissioner appealed against an award of damages for false imprisonment. The claimant had been arrested shortly after a terrorist attack. The judge had held that they had no reasonable belief of his involvement. The Commissioner did not now pursue an argument of necessity. Held: The only cause suggested for suspicion of the claimant was … Continue reading Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Raissi: CA 12 Nov 2008
The Court considered the nature of the documents which fall within the section and, secondly, the scope of the defence of reasonable excuse under section 58(3). Held: ‘A document or record will only fall within section 58 if it is of a kind that is likely to provide practical assistance to a person committing or … Continue reading K v Regina: CACD 13 Feb 2008
The court set the questions to be answered later in response to the complaint as to the use of stop and search powers by the British police. Citations: 4158/05,  ECHR 521 Links: Bailii Statutes: European Convention on Human Rights 5 8 10, Terrorism Act 2000 44 Jurisdiction: Human Rights Citing: At First Instance – … Continue reading Gillan and Quinton v The United Kingdom: ECHR 10 Jun 2008
The Secretary of state had sought to register an organisation as a terrorist organisation (PMOI). The organisation had successfully appealed to the Proscribed Organisations Appeals Commission (POAC). The secretary now renewed his application for leave to appeal. The PMO had previously been involved in violence but said that it had abandoned violence several years ago, … Continue reading Secretary of State for the Home Department v Lord Alton of Liverpool and others: CA 7 May 2008
The defendants, accused of offences under the 2000 Act, appealed an interim finding that documents stored on computers could amount to ‘articles’ within the Act. They said that the existence of sections 57 and 58 suggested two distinct regimes, one for documents, and one for articles. Held: The district judge should have followed Rowe. The … Continue reading M, Regina v; Regina v Z; Regina v I; Regina v R; Regina v B (No 2): CACD 27 Apr 2007
Appeal by way of case stated by the appellant arising from his conviction before the Chief Magistrate, sitting in the Westminster Magistrates’ Court for an offence of wilfully obstructing or seeking to frustrate a search or examination contrary to para. 18(1)(c) of Schedule 7 (‘Sch.7’) to the Terrorism Act 2000 Judges: Lady Justice Nicola Davies … Continue reading Cifci v Crown Prosecution Service: Admn 1 Jul 2022
The applicant said that his human rights had been infringed under laws which required him to apply to the high court for bail rather than to a magistrate, necessitating a further four day wait before his application for bail was considered. He had been remanded after admitting an armed robbery, though the police had not … Continue reading McKay v The United Kingdom: ECHR 3 Oct 2006
Application for judicial review of refusal to hear bail application in public. The bail application before the magistrates had been held in public, but not that to the crown court, as was normal practice. The issue on such an application is not the merits of the refusal of bail, but the process by which the … Continue reading Malik v Central Criminal Court and Another: Admn 27 Jun 2006
The court considered the test for whether the requirement for the Attorney General’s consent to a prosecution had been obtained, and said: ‘The analysis of the statutory language: . . there are two questions. i) When were the proceedings instituted? ii) If the permission of the Attorney General was not given before the proceedings were … Continue reading Lambert, Regina v: CACD 3 Apr 2009
The court considered the compatibility of section 41 with the suspect’s article 5 Human Rights insofar as it failed to provide a mechanism for a suspect to challenge his detention and be released on conditions of bail. Held: No arguable case had been made out. Judges: Collins J Citations:  EWHC 2146 (Admin) Links: Bailii … Continue reading I, Regina (On the Application of) v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court and Another: Admn 28 Aug 2008
The applicants challenged by way of judicial review the way they had been stopped and searched under the Act. They attended a demonstration. The search revealed nothing suspicious. General authorisations for such searches had been issued under the Act. Held: The section should not be read so as to restrict the power to issue authorisations … Continue reading Gillan and Another, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis and Another: Admn 31 Oct 2003
Having been convicted of theft, a confiscation order had been made against which the appellant appealed. The Court of Appeal certified a question of whether confiscation provisions under the 1988 Act were in breach of the defendant’s human rights. Are applications for confiscation orders criminal proceedings under the Convention, and if so do the assumptions … Continue reading Regina v Rezvi: HL 24 Jan 2002
Appeals against conviction. Alamgir was convicted of three offences contrary to s.12(3) of the Terrorism Act 2000, encouraging support for a proscribed organisation. Bashir was convicted of one count, as was Khan. In addition, Khan was also convicted of an offence of arranging a meeting to support a proscribed organisation contrary to s.12(2). Citations:  … Continue reading Alamgir and Others, Regina v: CACD 4 Jul 2018
The appellant Choudry appeals with the leave of the Single Judge against a sentence of 4 years’ imprisonment for an offence of encouraging support for a proscribed organisation contrary to s.12 of the Terrorism Act 2000. Citations:  EWCA Crim 21,  1 Cr App R (S) 49,  WLR(D) 30,  4 WLR 40 … Continue reading Alamgir and Others, Regina v: CACD 18 Jan 2018
The defendants appealed a ruling by the recorder that electronic storage devices were ‘articles’ within s57. S58 dealt with documents, and section 57 with articles. Held: Hooper LJ said: ‘There is no practical difference between a book which a person can read (perhaps with help) and a CD which can be read by inserting it … Continue reading M and Others, Regina v: CACD 7 Feb 2007
The defendant was charged with offences for having been in possession of a document or record containing information of a kind ‘likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism’. It was thought he was associated with a terrorist plan to attack the government of Libya. The defendant argued that … Continue reading Regina v F: CACD 16 Feb 2007
The claimant had been released on licence after conviction for an offence under the 2000 Act. He was subject to a terrorism prevention and investigation measure for a year, but now appealed against a rejection of his request for a variation of the conditions. Judges: Mitting J Citations:  EWHC 1970 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: … Continue reading The Secretary of State for The Home Department v EB: Admn 29 Jul 2016
The appellants had challenged the lawfulness of being stopped and searched by police. The officers relied on an authorisation made under the 2000 Act. They had been on their way to attending an arms fair, intending to demonstrate. Held: The Act was to be interpreted without deference to the respondent, and because of the powers … Continue reading Gillan and Quinton, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Another: CA 29 Jul 2004
Claim for damages for wrongful arrest and false imprisonment. The claimants had been arrested an held as brothers of a third brother arrested for suspicion of involvement in the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the US. The police applied to have excluded documents including interception warrants. Judges: McCombe J Citations:  EWHC 3421 (QB) Links: Bailii … Continue reading Raissi v Commissioner of Police: QBD 15 Nov 2007
The claimant challenged the decision to extend his detention for questioning to 21 days. Citations:  EWHC 2467 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Terrorism Act 2000 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Citing: Cited – Regina v Manchester Crown Court ex parte Williams and Simpson 1990 If an application to prefer a Voluntary Bill is successful there is … Continue reading Hussain, Regina (on the Application of) v Crown Prosecution Service: Admn 29 Aug 2006
The Mujaheddin-e-Khalq had been proscribed under the 2000 Act by the respondent. It now appealed against such proscription. Held: The organisation had in the past used terrorist methods, but had repeatedly now renounced the use of violence. The proscription could not be upheld. Sir Harry Ognall said: ‘We have reached the clear conclusion that the … Continue reading Lord Alton of Liverpool and Others v Secretary of Dtate for the Home Department: POAC 30 Nov 2007
Appeal by case stated from a conviction before the Westminster Magistrates’ Court for an offence of wilfully obstructing or seeking to frustrate a search or examination contrary to paragraph 18(1)(c) of Schedule 7 to the 2000 Act. He had refused when asked to provide the pin number and password for his mobile phone. Held: The … Continue reading Rabbani v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 15 May 2018
Application for a production order under paragraph 5 of Schedule 5 to the Terrorism Act 2000. Costs after withdrawal of application. Citations:  EW Misc B2 (CCrimC) Links: Bailii Jurisdiction: England and Wales Costs Updated: 06 April 2022; Ref: scu.633107
Renewed application for leave to appeal from conviction of offences under the 2000 Act. Judges: Sharp DB LJ, King J, Wall QC HHJ Citations:  EWCA Crim 1606 Links: Bailii Statutes: Terrorism Act 2000 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Crime Updated: 31 March 2022; Ref: scu.597484
The defendant had been tried for an offence under the Act of being a member of a proscribed organisation, and professing membership of Hamas. At trial the Crown accepted an evidential burden, that the offence had to be read down to comply with the defendant’s article 6.2 rights, and the defendant was acquitted. A reference … Continue reading Attorney General’s Reference No 4 of 2002: CACD 21 Mar 2003
Application to quash the decision of the Greater Manchester Police to exclude Mr A, a solicitor, from acting for and advising M, a detainee in custody under section 41 of the Terrorism Act 2000. Judges: Mr Justice Beatson Citations:  EWHC 2396 (Admin) Links: Bailii Statutes: Terrorism Act 2000 41 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Police, … Continue reading Omar Malik, Regina (on The Application of) v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester: Admn 5 Sep 2006
The claimants, Pakistani students in the UK on student visas, had been arrested and held by the defendants under the 2000 Act before being released 13 days later without charge. They were at first held incognito. They said that their arrest and detentions had been unlawful since they had not been given sufficient information about … Continue reading Sher and Others v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police and Others: Admn 21 Jul 2010
Application for leave to appeal against a conviction of six offences of possession of an article for a purpose connected with the commission, preparation or instigation of an act of terrorism. Latham VP CACD LJ, Gross Lloyd Jones JJ  EWCA Crim 2829 Bailii Terrorism Act 2000 57 England and Wales Crime Updated: 27 January … Continue reading Altimimi, Regina v: CACD 6 Nov 2008
Lord Justice Holroyde Mr Justice Swift  EWHC 798 (Admin),  Crim LR 731,  WLR(D) 217,  2 Cr App R 11,  1 WLR 3623 Bailii, WLRD Terrorism Act 2000 13(1), European Convention on Human Rights, Human Rights Act 1998 England and Wales Cited by: Appeal from – Pwr v Director of Public … Continue reading Pwr and Others v Director of Public Prosecutions: Admn 3 Apr 2020
The appellants carried a flag of the Kurdistan Workers Party, a proscribed organisation at a demonstration, and were convicted of a section 13(1) offence. The Crown Court dismissed their appeals, holding that section 13(1) created an offence of strict liability meaning that the offence did not require knowledge of the import of the article displayed, … Continue reading Pwr v Director of Public Prosecutions: SC 26 Jan 2022
The claimant had been stopped at Heathrow by the defendant’s officers, and an encrypted data device had been taken from him using powers derived from the 2000 Act. The device was thought to contain material taken from the US NSA security service. He said that the use of such powers was excessive. Lord Dyson MR, … Continue reading Miranda, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Others: CA 19 Jan 2016
The defendants said that the stop and search powers granted under the 2000 Act were too wide, and infringed their human rights. Each had been stopped when innocently attending demonstrations in London, and had been effectively detained for about twenty minutes or more before being allowed to continue. An authorisation had been granted by an … Continue reading Gillan, Regina (on the Application of) v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and Another: HL 8 Mar 2006
The claimants had been stopped by the police using powers in the 2000 Act. They were going to a demonstration outside an arms convention. There was no reason given for any suspicion that the searches were needed. Held: The powers given to the police were too wide, provided inadequate protection against abuse, and violated the … Continue reading Gillan and Quinton v The United Kingdom: ECHR 12 Jan 2010
Application for permission to appeal against two preparatory rulings. Held: Refused. Sharp LJ, Irwin, William Davies JJ  EWCA Crim 2650 Bailii Terrorism Act 2006 2(1)(a) 2(c)(d), Terrorism Act 2000 58(1)(b) England and Wales Criminal Practice Updated: 24 December 2021; Ref: scu.539990
The defendants appealed against their convictions for possessing articles for a terrorist purpose. Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers CJ  EWCA Crim 184,  2 WLR 1013,  QB 810,  2 Cr App R 8,  4 All ER 46 Bailii Terrorism Act 2000 57 England and Wales Cited by: Cited – Regina v … Continue reading Zafar and others v Regina: CACD 13 Feb 2008
The claimants had been arrested under the 2000 Act, held for differing lengths of time and released without charge. They sought damages for false imprisonment. Held: The officers had acted on their understanding that senior offcers had more information than they had themselves. As to one defendant there were better grounds for suspicion, and her … Continue reading Raissi and Another v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis: QBD 30 Nov 2007
The court was asked whether somebody detained under section 7 of the 2000 Act was entitled to be accompanied by a solicitor during questioning. The claimant was stopped at the airport on his return from Saudi Arabia. Police refused to await the arrival of his solicitor before starting to question him. They proceeded and he … Continue reading Elosta v Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis and Others: Admn 6 Nov 2013
The defendant had been convicted of possessing articles for terrorist purposes, namely a notebook with notes setting out how to construct a mortar bomb in his handwriting. There was also a coded list of potential targets. Held: The decision in R v M ‘that ‘articles’ within the meaning of section 57 cannot extend to documents … Continue reading Rowe v Regina: CACD 15 Mar 2007
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
Questions on Entry must be answered B was questioned at an airport under Schedule 7 to the 2000 Act, and required to answer questions asked by appropriate officers for the purpose set out. She refused to answer and was convicted of that refusal , contrary to paragraph 18 of that Schedule. She appealed, saying that … Continue reading Beghal v Director of Public Prosecutions: SC 22 Jul 2015
The claimant had supported the grant of a visa to a woman in order to speak to members of Parliament who was de facto leader of an Iranian organsation which had in the past supported terrorism and had been proscribed in the UK, but that proscription had been cancelled by the Tribunal. Lord Carlile appealed … Continue reading Lord Carlile of Berriew QC, and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department: SC 12 Nov 2014
The defendants had been convicted on guilty pleas of offences under the 2006 Act. Dart had been sentenced to a six year term and a five year extended sentence. Other received shorter and longer sentences as appropriate. They now applied for leave to appeal against sentence. Held: Leave was refused for three defendants, but given … Continue reading Dart and Others v Regina: CACD 31 Oct 2014
The defendants appealed against conviction and sentence for membership of an organisation proscribed under the 2000 Act. The defendants said that at the time they joined the organisation was not proscribed, and had left before it became proscribed. They said that they had gone to Germany to make explicit their resignations and were stopped on … Continue reading Hundal and Dhaliwal, Regina v: CACD 3 Feb 2004
Mr Gul appealed against a dismissal of his appeal against his conviction for dissemination of terrorist publications contrary to section 2 of the 2006 Act. The Court was now asked as to the meaning of ‘terrorism’ in section 1 of the Terrorism Act 2000. Held: The appeal failed. The word ‘terrorism’ on the 2000 Act … Continue reading Gul, Regina v: SC 23 Oct 2013
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
The defendant had faced trial on terrorist charges. He claimed that delay and the very substantial adverse publicity had made his fair trial impossible, and that it was not an offence for a foreign national to solicit murders to be carried out abroad. Held: The appeal failed. Murder is singled out as an offence even … Continue reading Regina v Abu Hamza: CACD 28 Nov 2006
Information Rights Section 30(1)(a)(i) of Freedom of Information Act – exemption from disclosure for information held for the purpose of a criminal investigation (ascertaining whether a person should be charged with a criminal offence) – Schedule 7 to the Terrorism Act 2000 – detention and questioning under Schedule 7 not per se a criminal investigation … Continue reading Edward Williams v Information Commissioner;, Chief Constable of Kent Police (Information Rights): UTAA 21 Jun 2021
The applicants alleged a violation of Article 6-1 and 3 (c) in that they had been interviewed by the police without access to a lawyer and that the evidence obtained from those interviews was used at their respective trials. Held: As to the first three claimants: ‘the applicants, not the prosecution, brought the safety interview … Continue reading Ibrahim And Others v The United Kingdom: ECHR 16 Dec 2014
The appellant had sought judicial review of the decision to extend the warrant for his detention. On an application to extend the warrant of detention, the judge had excluded the appellant and his solicitor from the hearing for about 10 minutes to consider closed information and, when the hearing resumed, they were not informed of … Continue reading Ward v Police Service of Northern Ireland: HL 21 Nov 2007
G was to stand trial for possession of articles useful for terrorism. Whilst in prison, he collected and created diagrams and information and prepared plans to bomb a local army centre. When arrested he said he had done so to upset the prison officers. He suffered paranoid schizophrenia. It had been held that his mental … Continue reading Regina v G; Regina v J: HL 4 Mar 2009
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
Possessing information likely to be useful to terrorism . .
The defendants sought leave to appeal against their convictions for conspiracy to murder after involvement in a plot to explode several bombs on the London Transport system. They said that it had not been their intention to explode the devices.
The defendants appealed their convictions for being members of proscribed organisations. They were members of the ‘Real IRA’, but only the IRA was actually proscribed.
Held: The appeals failed. In construing an Act of Parliament it may be of . .
Renewed application for leave to appeal from convictions of offences preparatory to terrorism. . .
The claimant alleged that his detention by the police and the removal from him of encrypted computer storage devices purporting to use powers under the 2000 Act. He and his journalist partner had received and published materials said to be of . .
The applicants complained of the refusal of a visitors permit by the respondent to an eminent Iranian dissident.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. Although the decision was an interference in the human rights of the applicants, that . .
The defendant appealed against his conviction for conveying ‘List A’ articles into prison. He said that the proceedings had been a nullity for failure to comply with the requirements of Schedule 3 of the 1998 Act. He had not been notified of the . .
The defendant appealed against his conviction under the 2006 Act for disseminating terrorist publications. He had uploaded to the internet videos showing attacks ofn coalition forces on soldiers of the coalition. He said that his were not acts . .
The claimant had invited an Iranian dissident to speak in Parliament, and now challenged the decision of the Home Secretary to refuse her a visa on the basis that her exclusion was not conducive to the public good. She was a member of an . .
The claimant an Ethiopian national had been detained on arrival on the basis that his presence woiuld not be for the public good. After appeal his indefinite leave to remain was regranted, and he was released from custody into immigration detention. . .
The defendants were accused of assisting a person to evade a control order. On arrest their computers had been seized, and they now sought an order on an interim appeal to discharge the case under the 2000 Act of not providing passwords to encrypted . .
The claimant, an Iraqi national, had been about to be deported when he was re-arrested for Terrorism offences for which he was acquitted. He was then made subject to a non-derogating control order. He now challenged the renewal of that order, even . .
References: PC/02/2006 Links: swarb.co.uk, statewatch Coram: Sir Harry Ognall C, Boswell QC, Catchpole QC The Mujaheddin-e-Khalq had been proscribed under the 2000 Act by the respondent. It now appealed against such proscription. Held: The organisation had in the past used terrorist methods, but had repeatedly now renounced the use of violence. The proscription could not … Continue reading Lord Alton of Liverpool and Others v Secretary of Dtate for the Home Department; POAC 30 Nov 2007
Please note (June 2010: that these law-bytes will soon (but not very soon and slowly) be re-organised, and re-posted within the main swarb.co.uk law-blog. This will allow much more powerful crosslinking for users between the various pages. All the existing pages will be left in place, but only the replacements will be updated. Eventually all … Continue reading law-bytes
The defendant sought to defend the claim for defamation by claiming fair comment. The claimant said that the relevant facts were not known to the defendant at the time of the publication. Held: To claim facts in aid of a defence of fair comment, it would make no sense if those facts were not known … Continue reading Lowe v Associated Newspapers Ltd: QBD 28 Feb 2006
(Scotland) The appellant had variously been convicted in reliance on evidence gathered at different stages before arrest, but in each case without being informed of any right to see a solicitor. The court was asked, as a devolution issue, at what point the duty to allow access to a solicitor arose, and what use might … Continue reading Ambrose v Harris, Procurator Fiscal, Oban, etc: SC 6 Oct 2011
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
Loss of Confidentiality Protection – public domain A retired secret service employee sought to publish his memoirs from Australia. The British government sought to restrain publication there, and the defendants sought to report those proceedings, which would involve publication of the allegations made. The AG sought to restrain those publications. Held: A duty of confidence … Continue reading Attorney-General v Guardian Newspapers Ltd (No 2) (‘Spycatcher’): HL 13 Oct 1988