Tag: Human Rights

Ofulue and Another v Bossert: CA 29 Jan 2008

The claimants appealed an order finding that the defendant had acquired their land by adverse possession. They said that the defendant had asserted in defence to possession proceedings that they were tenants, and that this contradicted an intent to deny the claimants’ title.
Held: The appeal failed. A finding by the ECHR that a particular area falls within the contracting states’ margin of appreciation is therefore a signal to the national judge that the decision of the national authorities as to the content of rights within that area should receive appropriate respect. The court was to apply Pye -v- United Kingdom. The margin of appreciation given to a national court was not something to be retested on each adverse possession case. A person believing himself to be a tenant may still be in adverse possession, even if his belief that he is a tenant is incorrect. The statement in the pleadings did not amount to an acknowledgement.

Judges:

Arden LJ, May LJ, Sir Martin Nourse

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Civ 7, [2008] HRLR 20, [2008] 3 WLR 1253, [2008] UKHRR 447, [2009] Ch 1, [2008] NPC 8

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Limitation Act 1980 29, Land Registration Act 1925 75(1), Human Rights Act 1998 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – J A Pye (Oxford) Ltd and Others v Graham and Another HL 4-Jul-2002
The claimants sought ownership by adverse possession of land. Once the paper owner had been found, they indicated a readiness to purchase their interest. The court had found that this letter contradicted an animus possidendi. The claimant had . .
Applied – J A Pye (Oxford) Ltd v The United Kingdom ECHR 30-Aug-2007
UK Advers Possession Law – Not Compliant
The claimant had said that the UK law which allowed it to lose land by virtue of twelve year’s occupation by a squatter, interfered with its right to ownership of property.
Held: The UK law on adverse possession did comply with the Convention. . .
Cited – J A Pye (Oxford) Ltd v The United Kingdom ECHR 15-Nov-2005
The claimants had been the registered proprietors of land, they lost it through the adverse possession of former tenants holding over. They claimed that the law had dispossessed them of their lawful rights.
Held: The cumulative effect of the . .
Cited – Belfast City Council v Miss Behavin’ Ltd HL 25-Apr-2007
Belfast had failed to license sex shops. The company sought review of the decision not to grant a licence.
Held: The council’s appeal succeeded. The refusal was not a denial of the company’s human rights: ‘If article 10 and article 1 of . .
Cited – Regina v Director of Public Prosecutions, ex parte Kebilene and others HL 28-Oct-1999
(Orse Kebeline) The DPP’s appeal succeeded. A decision by the DPP to authorise a prosecution could not be judicially reviewed unless dishonesty, bad faith, or some other exceptional circumstance could be shown. A suggestion that the offence for . .
Cited – Miailhe v France (No 2) ECHR 26-Sep-1996
Hudoc Preliminary objection joined to merits (victim); Preliminary objection rejected (victim); Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); Preliminary objection rejected (ratione materiae); No violation of . .
No longer correct – Beaulane Properties Ltd v Palmer ChD 23-Mar-2005
The paper owner sought possession of land. The defendant said he had acquired a possessory title. The land was registered.
Held: The claimant’s human rights under article 1 were engaged. To be justifiable, the interference in that right had to . .
Cited – Powell v McFarlane ChD 1977
Intention to Establish Adverse Possession of Land
A squatter had occupied the land and defended a claim for possession. The court discussed the conditions necessary to establish an intention to possess land adversely to the paper owner.
Held: Slade J said: ‘It will be convenient to begin by . .
Cited – Buckinghamshire County Council v Moran CA 13-Feb-1989
The parties’ respective properties were separated by a fence or hedge and the true owner had no access to the disputed land. In 1967 the Defendants’ predecessors in title began to maintain the land by mowing the grass and trimming the hedges and . .
Cited – Lodge (T/A JD Lodge) v Wakefield Metropolitan Council CA 21-Mar-1995
The plaintiff had formerly been a tenant of the defendant under an informal tenancy. No rent had been paid since 1974. He claimed to have acquired the land by adverse possession. He gave evidence at trial that if he had been asked to pay rent at any . .
Cited – Re Flynn (no 2) 1969
An acknowledgement of title to restart a limitation period must be precisely focused on a disputed right. . .
Cited – Surrendra Overseas Ltd v Government of Sri Lanka 1977
A debtor can only be held to have acknowledged the claim if he has in effect admitted his legal liability to pay that which the plaintiff seeks to recover. An acknowledgement of part only of a debt cannot operate to acknowledge more.
Kerr J . .
Cited – Markfield Investments Ltd v Evans CA 9-Nov-2000
The claimants were paper owners of land occupied by the defendant. The claimant said the acquiescence had been interrupted by an abortive court action by the claimant’s predecessor in title.
Held: With regard to any particular action the . .
Cited – BP Properties Ltd v Buckler CA 31-Jul-1987
The putative owner of the paper title wrote to the defendant who occupied the relevant property in October 1974 as follows: ‘Since we wish to help you as much as possible we are prepared to allow you to remain in occupation of the house and garden . .
Cited – Horner v Cartwright CA 11-Jul-1989
Stuart Smith LJ discussed the status of pleadings in a limitation as an acknowledgement: ‘It is unnecessary for the purpose of this judgment to deal with Mr. Horner’s submission that a statement in an action once it is contained in a pleading enures . .
Cited – Rush and Tomkins Ltd v Greater London Council HL 3-Nov-1988
The parties had entered into contracts for the construction of dwellings. The contractors sought payment. The council alleged shortcomings in the works. The principal parties had settled the dispute, but a sub-contractor now sought disclosure of the . .
Cited – Re Gee and Co (Woolwich) Ltd 1975
Company accounts can acknowledge the company’s liability for debts as at the date at which the accounts are drawn up even if they are not finalised and signed until after that date. . .
Cited – Handyside v The United Kingdom ECHR 7-Dec-1976
Freedom of Expression is Fundamental to Society
The appellant had published a ‘Little Red Schoolbook’. He was convicted under the 1959 and 1964 Acts on the basis that the book was obscene, it tending to deprave and corrupt its target audience, children. The book claimed that it was intended to . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Ofulue and Another v Bossert HL 11-Mar-2009
The parties disputed ownership of land, one claiming adverse possession. In the course of negotations, the possessor made a without prejudice offer to purchase the paper owner’s title. The paper owner claimed that this was an acknowledgement under . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Limitation, Human Rights

Updated: 13 July 2022; Ref: scu.264011

McDonald, Regina (on the Application of) v Manchester Crown Court; Others: Admn 9 Nov 1998

Each defendant challenged decisions to extend the custody time limits.

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill LCJ, Collins J

Citations:

[1998] EWHC 319 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention of Human Rights 5, Bail Act 1976 4(1), Prosecution of Offences (Custody Time Limits) Regulations 1987

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice, Human Rights

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.263518

Perkins and R v The United Kingdom: ECHR 22 Oct 2002

ECHR Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8 ; No separate issue under Art. 14+8 ; Pecuniary damage – financial award ; Non-pecuniary damage – financial award ; Costs and expenses partial award – domestic proceedings ; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings

Citations:

44875/98, [2002] ECHR 690, 43208/98

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Human Rights

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.263114

Dickson and Another v United Kingdom: ECHR 15 Dec 2007

(Grand Chamber) The complainants were husband and wife. They had been married whilst the husband served a sentence of life imprisonment. They had been refused suport for artificial insemination treatment.
Held: The claim succeeded. The refusal infringed their human right to family and private life. The refusal had been on the basis that the couple’s relationship had not been tested under normal conditions, and that insufficient provision had been made for the care of any child born through a procedure. However a refusal of such treatment would effectively prevent the couple ever having children. No great security or administrative provisions were required. There is no place in human rights law for the refusal of humane treatment for any desire not to offend public opinion. The refusal also offended against the need for rehabilitation as the prisoner came toward the end of a long sentence.
If there is to be any restriction on Convention rights of prisoners or detainees, that has to be justified in each individual case. This justification can flow from the ‘necessary and inevitable consequences of imprisonment’ or from ‘an adequate link between the restriction and the circumstances of the prisoner in question’. But the justification cannot be based ‘solely on what would offend public opinion’.

Judges:

Rozakis P

Citations:

2008) 46 EHRR 41, [2007] ECHR 1050, Times 21-Dec-2007

Links:

Bailii Press Release, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8 12

Citing:

See Also – Dickson and Another v United Kingdom ECHR 18-Apr-2006
The applicants were husband and wife who wanted infertility treatment by IVF. Mr Dickson as a prisoner, and they complained that the refusal of facilities was an interference in their right to family life as a refusal to fulfil a positive . .

Cited by:

Cited – Marper v United Kingdom; S v United Kingdom ECHR 4-Dec-2008
(Grand Chamber) The applicants complained that on being arrested on suspicion of offences, samples of their DNA had been taken, but then despite being released without conviction, the samples had retained on the Police database.
Held: . .
Cited – AB, Regina (On the Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and Another Admn 4-Sep-2009
The claimant was serving a sentence of imprisonment. She was a pre-operative transgender woman, but held in a male prison. She sought review of a decision to refuse transfer to a women’s prison. The Gender Recognition Panel was satisfied that the . .
Cited – O’Dowd (Boy George) v National Probation Service London Admn 23-Dec-2009
Refusal of curfew relaxation was reasonable
The claimant had been released from prison early on licence subject to conditions including a home detention curfew. He was offered a place on a TV programme, Celebrity Big Brother, which would require relaxation or alteration of his place of . .
Cited – Bary and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and Another Admn 19-Mar-2010
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 . .
Cited – City of London v Samede and Others QBD 18-Jan-2012
The claimant sought an order for possession of land outside St Paul’s cathedral occupied by the protestor defendants, consisting of ‘a large number of tents, between 150 and 200 at the time of the hearing, many of them used by protestors, either . .
Cited – T and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department and Another SC 18-Jun-2014
T and JB, asserted that the reference in certificates issued by the state to cautions given to them violated their right to respect for their private life under article 8 of the Convention. T further claims that the obligation cast upon him to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Prisons

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.262978

Irene M Scott v The United Kingdom: ECHR 8 Feb 2000

(Admissibility) The court was asked whether the mother’s Article 8 rights had been breached by a local authority who had applied to free her child for adoption, the court once again stated that ‘the best interests of the child is always of crucial importance’.

Citations:

34745/97, [2000] ECHR 698, 2000 Fam LR 102, [2000] 1 FLR 958, [2000] Fam Law 538, [2000] 2 FCR 560

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Payne v Payne; P v P CA 13-Feb-2001
No presumption for Mother on Relocation
The mother applied for leave to return to New Zealand taking with the parties’ daughter aged four. The father opposed the move, saying that allowing the move would infringe his and the child’s right to family life. He had been refused residence.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Children

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.263016

Garrett, Falcao And Others v Portugal: ECHR 11 Jan 2000

Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (ratione temporis); Violation of P1-1; Not necessary to examine Art. 6, 13 and 17; Just satisfaction reserved; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention proceedings

Citations:

[2000] ECHR 2, 30229/96, [2000] ECHR 2, [2001] ECHR 249, 29813/96

Links:

Worldlii, Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

See Also – Garrett, Falcao And Others v Portugal ECHR 10-Apr-2001
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.263008

Smith And Grady v United Kingdom (Article 41): ECHR 25 Jul 2000

Citations:

33986/96, [2000] ECHR 384, 33985/96

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Citing:

See Also – Smith and Grady v The United Kingdom ECHR 27-Sep-1999
The United Kingdom’s ban on homosexuals within the armed forces was a breach of the applicants’ right to respect for their private and family life. Applicants had also been denied an effective remedy under the Convention. The investigations into . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.263024

Jaso and others v Central Criminal Court No.2 Madrid: Admn 14 Dec 2007

The Madrid Court had issued European Arrest Warrants against the three appellants on charges of membership of a criminal organisation and terrorism. The appellants had unsuccessfully challenged extradition before the District Judge on a large number of grounds. These included the contention that extradition would violate articles 3, 5, 6 and 8 of the Convention. The appellants said that, if extradited, they would be subject to incommunicado police detention for up to 5 days. The District Judge had applied an exceptionality test and this was attacked.
Held: Dyson LJ applied Huang, and said that there was no exceptionality test, though: ‘It is clear that great weight should be accorded to the legitimate aim of honouring extradition treaties made with other states. Thus, although it is wrong to apply an exceptionality test, in an extradition case there will have to be striking and unusual facts to lead to the conclusion that it is disproportionate to interfere with an extraditee’s article 8 rights.’

Judges:

Dyson LJ

Citations:

[2007] EWHC 2983 (Admin), [2008] 1 WLR 2798

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Extradition Act 2003 21(3), European Convention on Human Rights 3 5 6 8

Citing:

Applied – Huang v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 21-Mar-2007
Appellate Roles – Human Rights – Families Split
The House considered the decision making role of immigration appellate authorities when deciding appeals on Human Rights grounds, against refusal of leave to enter or remain, under section 65. In each case the asylum applicant had had his own . .

Cited by:

Incorrectly decided – Louca v Public Prosecutor In Bielefel, Germany Admn 27-Nov-2008
The defendant objected to the extradition order, saying that the European arrest warrant relied on did not disclose other warrants issued for the same offences.
Held: The Act required the warrant to be validated by the issuing national court. . .
Cited – Louca v A German Judicial Authority SC 19-Nov-2009
The defendant resisted extradition saying that the European Arrest Warrant was defective in not revealing the existence of two earlier such warrants. He said that absence of such information would hinder a court which was concerned as to possible . .
Cited – Norris v Government of United States of America SC 24-Feb-2010
The defendant faced extradition to the USA on charges of the obstruction of justice. He challenged the extradition on the basis that it would interfere with his article 8 rights to family life, given that the offence was merely ancillary, the result . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Extradition, Human Rights

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.262174

Timpul Info-Magazin and Anghel v Moldova: ECHR 27 Nov 2007

Particularly strong reasons must be provided for any measure limiting access to information which the public has the right to receive.

Citations:

42864/05, [2007] ECHR 976

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Times Newspapers Ltd (Nos. 1 And 2) v The United Kingdom ECHR 10-Mar-2009
The applicant alleged that the rule under United Kingdom law whereby each time material is downloaded from the Internet a new cause of action in libel proceedings accrued (‘the Internet publication rule’) constituted an unjustifiable and . .
Cited – Seckerson and Times Newspapers Ltd v The United Kingdom ECHR 24-Jan-2012
The first applicant had been chairman of a jury and had expressed his concerns about their behaviour to the second applicant who published them. They were prosecuted under the 1981 Act. They had said that no details of the deliberations had been . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Media

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.261873

Pfeifer v Austria: ECHR 15 Nov 2007

The right to protect one’s honour and reputation is to be treated as falling within the protection of Article 8: ‘a person’s reputation, even if that person is criticised in the context of a public debate, forms part of his or her personal identity and psychological integrity.’

Citations:

12556/03, [2007] ECHR 935, (2007) 48 EHRR 175, 24 BHRC 167

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 8

Jurisdiction:

Human Rights

Cited by:

Cited – Mardas v New York Times Company and Another QBD 17-Dec-2008
The claimant sought damages in defamation. The US publisher defendants denied that there had been any sufficient publication in the UK and that the court did not have jurisdiction. The claimant appealed the strike out of the claims.
Held: The . .
Cited – Flood v Times Newspapers Ltd QBD 2-Oct-2009
The defendant had published a story in its newspaper. At that time it attracted Reynolds qualified privilege. After the circumstances changed, the paper offered an updating item. That offer was rejected as inadequate.
Held: The qualified . .
Cited – In re Guardian News and Media Ltd and Others; HM Treasury v Ahmed and Others SC 27-Jan-2010
Proceedings had been brought to challenge the validity of Orders in Council which had frozen the assets of the claimants in those proceedings. Ancillary orders were made and confirmed requiring them not to be identified. As the cases came to the . .
Cited – Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd QBD 16-Jun-2010
The claimant said that a review of her book was defamatory and a malicious falsehood. The defendant now sought summary judgment or a ruling as to the meaning of the words complained of.
Held: The application for summary judgment succeeded. The . .
Cited – Flood v Times Newspapers Ltd CA 13-Jul-2010
The claimant police officer complained of an article he said was defamatory in saying he was being investigated for allegations of accepting bribes. The article remained on the internet even after he was cleared. Each party appealed interim orders. . .
See Also – Pfeifer v Austria ECHR 2009
. .
Cited – Flood v Times Newspapers Ltd SC 21-Mar-2012
The defendant had published an article which was defamatory of the claimant police officer, saying that he was under investigation for alleged corruption. The inquiry later cleared him. The court was now asked whether the paper had Reynolds type . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Defamation

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.261434