The Prime Minister has said that he is “uneasy” about the development of a privacy law by judges based on the European Convention when this should be a matter for parliament. In our contribution to the continuing debate on this issue we are re-posting this [update - three part!] discussion on the history and future of privacy [...]
Archive for April, 2011
Privacy: the way ahead? Part 1 – Hugh Tomlinson QC
Posted in Art. 10 | Freedom of Expression, Art. 8 | Right to Privacy/Family, Defamation / Libel, Freedom of Information, In the news, Media on April 29, 2011 | 1 Comment »
Wrongs and rights, more wrangles
Posted in In the news, Terrorism on April 28, 2011 |
[Updated] When blogging about the Great Strasbourg Debate, Adam Wagner recently reflected that he and I are”good cop, bad cop”. No prizes for guessing who plays which role. Anyway, for what it’s worth, here are a few pensées on the recent news that the Daily Telegraph is backing a reform campaign (see Adam’s post on [...]
Luck, human rights and the lottery winning rapist
Posted in Case comments, Costs and Procedure, Damages, Protocol 1 Art. 1 | Peaceful enjoyment of property on April 27, 2011 | 8 Comments »
Iorworth HOARE v the United Kingdom – 16261/08 [2011] ECHR 722 (12 April 2011) – Read decision Potential future US president Donald Trump once said that “Everything in life is luck“. Sometimes a case arises from such an unlikely factual scenario that it raises questions about the relationship between justice, fairness and luck. This is [...]
Albie Sachs – start with the issues, forget the parties
Posted in Case comments, Costs and Procedure, Environment, European, Freedom of Information, In the news on April 27, 2011 |
Biowatch Trust v Registrar Genetic Resources and Others (CCT 80/08) [2009] ZACC 14 – read judgment Costs again, I am afraid, and how to make sure that ordinary people can litigate important cases without being stifled by a huge costs bill if they lose. I have a certain amount of “form” for it on this [...]
Ban on religious couple adopting?.. On the naughty step
Posted in Art. 9 | Thought/Conscience/Religion, Defamation / Libel, Family, In the news, Poor reporting on April 26, 2011 | 6 Comments »
Human rights and discrimination law are often criticised in the press. Sometimes the criticisms are justified, but the level of anger which a system of universal rights can generate is sometimes surprising. Unfortunately, some of that anger is caused by inaccurate reporting of judgments. In yesterday’s Telegraph online, Cristina Odone blogged on a recent “scandal” [...]
Doctors not entitled to be judged by independent panel
Posted in Art. 6 | Right to Fair Trial, Case comments, Employment, Medical on April 26, 2011 | 1 Comment »
R (on the application of Rajiv Puri) v Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2011] EWHC 970 (Admin) Judgment of Mr Justice Blair given on 15 April 2011 - Read judgment This claim for judicial review is the latest skirmish in The Wars of the HC [90] 9 Succession between doctors and NHS trusts about what [...]
What can we do about foreign criminals “using family rights to dodge justice”?
Posted in Art. 8 | Right to Privacy/Family, Criminal, Immigration/Extradition, In the news, Terrorism on April 25, 2011 | 8 Comments »
The Telegraph has launched a campaign to ”Stop foreign criminals using ‘family rights’ to dodge justice“. The perceived inability of judges to deport foreign criminals as a result of the European Convention on Human Rights, and in particular the right to family life, is one of the most commonly heard criticisms of human rights law. In [...]
A privacy injunction binding on the whole world
Posted in Art. 10 | Freedom of Expression, Art. 8 | Right to Privacy/Family, Case comments, Criminal, Defamation / Libel, Freedom of Information, In the news, tagged OPQ v BJM, privacy injunction on April 25, 2011 | 1 Comment »
OPQ v BJM [2011] EWHC 1059 (QB - Read judgment The case of OPQ v BJM addresses one of the most difficult practical issues in privacy law and adopts a novel solution. Eady J granted a “contra mundum” injunction – that is, one binding on the whole world – in an ordinary “blackmail” privacy case. This means that, although [...]
Roll up, roll up!
Posted in In the news, Technology, tagged legal blogs on April 24, 2011 | 3 Comments »
Someone pointed out to me yesterday that our blog roll, that is our list of links to other sites, had disappeared. To my horror, they were right, and to my double horror, it turned out that the list of links was woefully inadequate. So, the much-improved list is back, a bit lower down on the [...]
Gagging on privacy
Posted in Art. 10 | Freedom of Expression, Art. 8 | Right to Privacy/Family, Defamation / Libel, In the news, tagged privacy law through the front door, super injunctions on April 22, 2011 | 5 Comments »
When the prime minister criticises judges, he tends to speak from his gut. The prospect of prisoners being given the vote by European judges makes him feel “physically sick”. And now, he is “a little uneasy” about the rise of “a sort of privacy law without Parliament saying so“. David Cameron’s use of visceral language may [...]
Climate Camp protesters did not threaten breach of the peace, says High Court
Posted in Art. 11 | Freedom of Association, Case summaries, In the news, Police, Politics / Public Order on April 22, 2011 |
R (Moos and Anor) v The Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis [2011] EWHC 957 (Admin) – Read Judgment The High Court has decided that the actions of police in “kettling” climate change protestors during the G20 summit were unlawful. In the aftermath of the global credit crunch, the second G20 Summit, which was [...]
Hyped up fuss
Posted in In the news on April 21, 2011 | 5 Comments »
This has been an interesting week for the continuing “debate” over the future of the European Court of Human Rights. Stay tuned for an explanation of the quotation marks. First, Dominic Raab MP has released a pamphlet with the think-tank CIVITAS entitled Strasbourg in the Dock. Raab, a former lawyer, has been a vocal opponent [...]
Admin court grabs bull by the horns
Posted in Agriculture, Animals, Case comments, Environment, European, In the news, Protocol 1 Art. 1 | Peaceful enjoyment of property on April 20, 2011 | 1 Comment »
R (on the application of K and AC Jackson and Son) v DEFRA – read judgment. An interesting ruling in the Administrative Court this week touches on some issues fundamental to public law – the extent to which “macro” policy (such as EC law) should trump principles of good administration; the role of factual evidence [...]
Welcome!
Browse by legal topic
Recommended- Assange v The Swedish Prosecution Authority [2012] UKSC 22 (30 May 2012) May 30, 2012Supreme Court rules by 5-2 majority that Julian Assange must be extradited to Sweden. Definition of "judicial authority" is a wide one.
- Supreme Court judgment: Assange v Swedish Judicial Authority - Carl Gardner May 30, 2012
- Julian Assange's extradition stayed thanks to quick legal footwork | Joshua Rozenberg | Law | guardian.co.uk May 30, 2012
- New Judgment: Assange v The Swedish Judicial Authority [2012] UKSC 22 May 30, 2012
- What if Julian Assange loses in the Supreme Court? May 29, 2012
- Secret justice concessions won't silence its critics | The Spectator May 29, 2012
- ICLR's case summaries are now on Guardian Law | Daniel Hoadley | Law | guardian.co.uk May 29, 2012
- The High Court is unable to agree on Twitter Joke Trial appeal - David Allen Green May 28, 2012
- Assange v The Swedish Prosecution Authority [2012] UKSC 22 (30 May 2012) May 30, 2012
- Case law
- Assange v The Swedish Prosecution Authority [2012] UKSC 22 (30 May 2012) May 30, 2012Supreme Court rules by 5-2 majority that Julian Assange must be extradited to Sweden. Definition of "judicial authority" is a wide one.
- SCOPPOLA v. ITALY (No. 3) - 126/05 [2012] ECHR 868 (22 May 2012) May 23, 2012ECtHR Grand Chamber: automatic and indiscriminate disenfranchisement of prisoners unlawful but up to individual states how to implement changes were such a ban exist
- Dishonesty in entry clearance applications May 21, 2012An Upper Tribunal (UT) decision confirms that, where an application for entry clearance is “marred by dishonesty” – whether in the applicant’s knowledge or not and even where the applicant is presently eligible for entry – it is not a disproportionate response for the Home Secretary to refuse the application, even in light of Article 8
- MM and AO (A Child), R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWCA Civ 668 (18 May 2012) May 18, 2012Secretary of State acted lawfully in not ordering independent inquiry into 2009 protest at Immigration Detention Centre. Challenge by children separated from parents during protest and claiming pschiatric damage as result.
- British Sky Broadcasting Ltd & Ors, R (on the application of) v Chelmsford Crown Court [2012] EWHC 1295 (Admin) (17 May 2012) May 17, 2012Sky, BBC, ITN etc. succeed in JR of decision by court to order production of 100+ hours of video footage to Essex Police of Dale Farm protesters: "... there were no reasonable grounds for believing that the footage of over 100 hours included material likely to be of substantial value to the investigation"
- Humphreys v Revenue and Customs [2012] UKSC 18 (16 May 2012) May 16, 2012Supreme Court: paying child tax credit to "main" care giver not discriminatory under art.14 ECHR to father caring for child 3 days per week. The specific test for justifying discrimination in the context of state benefits is that with questions of social and economic strategy the Court will generally respect the legislature’s policy choice unless i […]
- Assange v The Swedish Prosecution Authority [2012] UKSC 22 (30 May 2012) May 30, 2012
-
UKHRB on Twitter
- #Assange loses SC appeal 5 votes to 2. Like to be #ECtHR application to block #extradition 4 hours ago
- #Assange Supreme Court decision imminent bbc.co.uk/news/uk-182594… #extradition 5 hours ago
- Also fresh on the blog- The Erika: Cour de Cassation has its thinking cap on by David Hart QC ukhumanrightsblog.com/2012/05/29/the… 5 hours ago
- Good morning all, @IsabelMcArdle here. Justive and Security Bill- the govt is not for turning by Angela Patrick ukhumanrightsblog.com/2012/05/29/jus… 5 hours ago
Adam Wagner on Twitter
- RT @simonmckay: Catt v Metropolitan Police. Important case on #protest and #dataretention. Would be surprised if it was not appealed:htt ... 47 minutes ago
- For anyone who hasn't read it > Justice & Security Bill: Government is not for turning - Angela Patrick of @justicehq: wp.me/pJiO3-3Gc 1 hour ago
- RT @CrowtherSimon: Excellent piece by @justicehq's Angela Patrick on Just& Sec Bill on @ukhumanrightsb ukhumanrightsblog.com/2012/05/29/jus… #secretj ... 1 hour ago
- RT @I_am_peevee: @AdamWagner1 @gideonconn "and excellent artist"... 1 hour ago
- My friend and brilliant musician @GideonConn has a brand new video: youtube.com/watch?v=tX-ZrZ… 1 hour ago
- Excellent from @joshuarozenerg on the potentially embarrassing mess surrounding the #Assange ruling is.gd/4Qs0h3 1 hour ago
- Recent posts
- The Erika: Cour de Cassation has its thinking cap on May 29, 2012 David Hart QC
- Justice and Security Bill: The Government is not for turning – Angela Patrick May 29, 2012 1 Crown Office Row
- We need to think about Kevin May 29, 2012 Rosalind English
- Key Justice and Security Bill resources May 29, 2012 Adam Wagner
- Free Speech at Work: A 1COR Seminar and Mock Trial – Wed 27th June May 29, 2012 1 Crown Office Row
- Time and time again: Article 6 to the rescue May 27, 2012 David Hart QC
- Prisoner voting, Bratza’s replacement and peaceful protest – The Human Rights Roundup May 27, 2012 Wessen Jazrawi
- The case for letting prisoners vote – Reuven Ziegler May 24, 2012 1 Crown Office Row
Disclaimer
Silence please: A Facebook contempt of court – allegedly
Posted in Art. 10 | Freedom of Expression, Art. 6 | Right to Fair Trial, Case comments, Costs and Procedure, Criminal, In the news, Judges and Juries, tagged contempt of court, Facebook, Judges and Juries on April 28, 2011 | 2 Comments »
A juror has found herself facing contempt of court charges, it being alleged that she communicated on Facebook with a defendant who had already been acquitted. These types of proceedings can have human rights implications in two ways: Article 6, providing the right to a fair trial can be infringed upon by improper communicaton by jurors, and [...]
Read Full Post »