Stanford v United Kingdom: ECHR 11 Apr 1994

A defendant’s difficulty in hearing the case because of a screen erected to protect the identity of witnesses did not vitiate the trial or make it unfair. The right to a fair trial included the right to be present and in a position to follow the proceedings.


R. Ryssdal, P


Ind Summary 11-Apr-1994, Times 08-Mar-1994, 16757/90, [1994] Ser A No 282-A, [1994] ECHR 6


Worldlii, HUDOC, Bailii


European Convention on Human Rights


Human Rights


CitedRex v Smellie CCA 1919
The defendant was accused of mistreating his eleven year old daughter. He was ordered to sit upon the stairs leading to the dock, out of her sight, in order to avoid her being intimidated.
Held: A judge could, using the courts own powers to . .
CitedRex v Lee Kun CCA 1916
Accused must hear and understand the proceedings
A judge, from the moment he embarks upon a trial until he is functus officio that trial, is under a duty to ensure that both the process and substance of the trial is fair, and that both are duly compliant with appropriate principles. Lord Reading . .

Cited by:

CitedSC v The United Kingdom ECHR 15-Jun-2004
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 6-1 ; Non-pecuniary damage – finding of violation sufficient ; Costs and expenses (domestic proceedings) – claim rejected ; Costs and expenses . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice, Human Rights

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.89490