The applicant had been convicted of serious criminal offences. There were admitted into evidence intercepts of messages to his pager. He complained that this infringed his right to respect for his private correspondence.
Held: The pager messages were correspondence. The UK legislation covering interception of correspondence did not apply to such materials, and accordingly any interception was not under a regime which was ‘in accordance with law’ as required, and infringed his rights.
Judges:
J-P Cost, Bratza, Loucaides, Birsan, Jungwiert, Butkevych, Thomassen
Citations:
Times 31-Oct-2002, 47114/99, [2002] ECHR 686
Links:
Statutes:
European Convention on Human Rights Art 8
Jurisdiction:
Human Rights
Cited by:
Cited – Wood v United Kingdom ECHR 16-Nov-2004
Police officers had placed suspects in a cell together and covertly recorded their conversation in order to obtain evidence against them. The events took place in 1999.
Held: The recording was outside any legal system of control and interefred . .
Cited – Amwell View School v Dogherty EAT 15-Sep-2006
amwell_dogherty
The claimant had secretly recorded the disciplinary hearings and also the deliberations of the disciplinary panel after their retirement. The tribunal had at a case management hearing admitted the recordings as evidence, and the defendant appealed, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Human Rights, Evidence, Criminal Practice
Updated: 11 July 2022; Ref: scu.177817