DCLG v. Information Commissioner & WR [2012] UKUT I have previously posted on the decision leading to this successful appeal by the Planning Inspectorate, against an order that they produce their legal advice concerning a planning appeal. The decision of the First-Tier Tribunal in favour of disclosure was reversed by a strong Upper Tribunal, chaired [...]
Archive for the ‘Art. 10 | Freedom of Expression’ Category
Anemometers and wind farms once more: PINS now win the day
Posted in Art. 10 | Freedom of Expression, Case comments, Case law, Environment, European, Freedom of Information, In the news on May 22, 2012 | Leave a Comment »
Comment: How will the Defamation Bill protect free speech?
Posted in Art. 10 | Freedom of Expression, Art. 8 | Right to Privacy/Family, Defamation / Libel, In the news, tagged Defamation Bill, free expression, libel reform, Queen's Speech on May 20, 2012 | 1 Comment »
As expected, last week’s Queen’s Speech included plans to reform libel law. This follows a concerted campaign to improve protection of the right to free expression and bring greater clarity to England’s libel law. But the question for those who wanted to see reform, now the Defamation Bill has been published, is whether the reforms [...]
Peace campaigner evicted from Parliament Square using new law – Marina Wheeler
Posted in Art. 10 | Freedom of Expression, Art. 11 | Freedom of Association, Case comments, Housing, Politics / Public Order, tagged Maria Gallastegui, Parliament square, Protest, protest rights on May 17, 2012 | 2 Comments »
R (on the application of Maria Gallastegui) v Westminster City Council [2012] EWHC 1123 (Admin) - Read judgment On 27 April 2012, Maria Gallastegui, a peace campaigner and resident of the East pavement of Parliament Square since 2006, lost her legal battle to continue her 24 hour, tented vigil in protest against the folly of [...]
Libel on the internet: Christian author takes on Dawkins and Amazon
Posted in Art. 10 | Freedom of Expression, Case comments, Case summaries, Costs and Procedure, Damages, Defamation / Libel, In the news, tagged abuse of process, blogs, comment thread, costs, human rights, internet, Libel on May 16, 2012 | 3 Comments »
Mcgrath v Dawkins, Amazon and others [2012] EWHC B3 (QB) -read judgment In an interesting ruling on a strike-out action against a libel claim, a High Court judge has delineated the scope for defamation in blog posts and discussion threads where the audience is small and the libel limited. Background The claimant, C, is the author [...]
Censure of councillor for “sarcastic, lampooning and disrespectful” blog breached his free speech rights
Posted in Art. 10 | Freedom of Expression, BLOG POSTS, Case comments, Case law, Case summaries, tagged blogging, blogs, human rights, Lewis Malcolm Calver, local government, Wales on May 7, 2012 | 3 Comments »
Calver, R (on the application of) v The Adjudication Panel for Wales [2012] EWHC 1172 (Admin) - Read judgment The decision to censure a Welsh councillor for comments on his blog was a disproportionate interference with his right to freedom of expression, the High Court has ruled. This right requires a broad interpretation of what counts [...]
Battle of the bus lanes: Addison Lee injuncted by High Court
Posted in Art. 10 | Freedom of Expression, Case summaries, Discrimination, Politics / Public Order, tagged Addison Lee on May 3, 2012 | 3 Comments »
Transport for London (TfL) v Griffin & Ors [2012] EWHC 1105 (QB) - Read Judgment Transport for London (TfL) have succeeded in their High Court application for an injunction restraining Addison Lee Taxis from encouraging drivers to use London bus lanes. Mr Justice Eder ruled that the injunction would not breach Addison Lee Chairman John Griffin’s free expression [...]
Hate speech and the meaning of “unacceptable behaviour”
Posted in Art. 10 | Freedom of Expression, Case summaries, Margin of Appreciation on April 26, 2012 |
Raed Mahajna v Secretary of State for the Home Department IA/21/21631/2011 – read judgment 1 Crown Office Row’s Neil Sheldon appeared for the Secretary of State in this case. He is not the writer of this post. Late last year I posted about the case of Mr Mahajna, a national of Israel (but of Palestinian [...]
“Thinking the unthinkable”? Freedom of information and the NHS Risk Register – Robin Hopkins
Posted in Art. 10 | Freedom of Expression, Case summaries, Freedom of Information, Medical, Politics / Public Order, tagged NHS Risk Register on April 16, 2012 | 1 Comment »
Department of Health v IC, Healey and Cecil(EA/2011/0286 & EA/2011/0287) - Read Decision In a recent post, Panopticon brought you, hot-off-the-press, the Tribunal’s decision in the much-publicised case involving publication, under Freedom of Information Law, of the NHS Risk Register. Somewhat less hot-off-the-press are my observations. This is a very important decision, both for its engagement [...]
The rising cost of free speech: Reynolds, contempt and Twitter
Posted in Art. 10 | Freedom of Expression, BLOG POSTS, Defamation / Libel, Features, In the news, Judges and Juries, tagged Flood v The Times, free speech, Libel, reynolds, Twitter on April 12, 2012 |
Free speech is under attack. Or so it seems. The last few weeks have been abuzz with stories to do with free speech: a Supreme Court ruling on the Reynolds defence to libel; contempt of court proceedings against an MP for comments made in a book and the latest in a growing line of criminal [...]
Security bodies, private emails: parallels between the UK and US – Robin Hopkins
Posted in Art. 10 | Freedom of Expression, Case comments, Freedom of Information, Politics / Public Order, Terrorism, tagged extraordinary rendition, freedom of information on April 12, 2012 |
Today was one of striking parallels between the USA and the UK in terms of litigation concerned with access to information. APPGER and security bodies First, one of The Independent‘s main stories this morning concerned a case brought in the US by the UK’s All Party Parliamentary Group on Extraordinary Rendition (APPGER). Readers will recall that [...]
Common-law open justice lets in the light; Strasbourg not the key
Posted in Art. 10 | Freedom of Expression, Case comments, Case law, Criminal, Freedom of Information, International, Media on April 10, 2012 | 4 Comments »
R (o.t.a Guardian Newspapers) v. City of Westminster Magistrates Court, USA as Interested Party, 3 April 2012, Court of Appeal: read judgment No, not a case about secret trials, but about the way in which newspapers can get hold of court papers in open oral hearings. And, as we shall see, it led to a [...]
BBC interview with terror suspect Barbar Ahmad
Posted in Art. 10 | Freedom of Expression, Art. 6 | Right to Fair Trial, Criminal, In the news, Terrorism on April 6, 2012 | 10 Comments »
I highly recommend Dominic Casciani’s excellent BBC Newsnight piece on Barbar Ahmad, which is currently available on iPlayer (UK only). Ahmad’s case cuts across a number of different rights controversies. The BBC challenged the Ministry of Justice’s initial refusal to allow an interview with the terrorist suspect, who is currently held at a maximum security [...]
The dangers of data snooping – Angela Patrick
Posted in Art. 10 | Freedom of Expression, Art. 8 | Right to Privacy/Family, Criminal, In the news, Police, Politics / Public Order, Technology, tagged Communications Data Bill 2008, data snooping, surveillance on April 6, 2012 | 6 Comments »
Civil liberties and the coalition have been happily filling the political pages this week. The damning conclusion of the Joint Committee on Human Rights that there is no evidence to justify expanding closed proceedings (expertly dissected by Rosalind English earlier in the week) vied for column inches with leaks that the Government planned to introduce [...]
Kettling: Can a public interest motive justify a deprivation of liberty or not? – Robert Wastell
Posted in Art. 10 | Freedom of Expression, Art. 11 | Freedom of Association, Art. 5 | Right to Liberty, Case comments, Case summaries, Police, Politics / Public Order on April 2, 2012 | 1 Comment »
Austin & Others v. The United Kingdom, [2012] ECHR 459, 15th March 2012 – read judgment The Grand Chamber of the ECtHR recently tackled the question of whether the police tactic of “kettling” (verb, UK, of the police – to contain demonstrators in a confined area) amounted to a deprivation of the liberty of four [...]
Welcome!
Browse by legal topic
Recommended- Latest human rights developments in the UK: 21/5/2012 – 27/5/2012 - Law Think May 27, 2012
- UK Blawg Review #10 – Part 1 - May 27, 2012
- Can the UK suspend free movement? - Free Movement Blog May 27, 2012
- Prisoners’ votes: Ballot and chain | The Economist May 25, 2012THE vexed issue of voting rights for prisoners combines two of the Conservative Party’s main preoccupations: penal policy and the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR)...
- We must defy Strasbourg on prisoner votes - David Davis and Jack Straw, Telegraph May 24, 2012
- Sunlight is the best disinfectant: open justice and company law proceedings May 24, 2012
- Names and CVs of Candidate Judges for Eight Countries May 24, 2012
- UK to resist giving prisoners the vote despite European court ruling | Law | The Guardian May 23, 2012
- Case law
- 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 […]
- Hounga v Allen & Anor [2012] EWCA Civ 609 (15 May 2012) May 16, 2012Court of Appeal: Person knowingly working illegally cannot bring racial discrimination claim against "employers"
- SCOPPOLA v. ITALY (No. 3) - 126/05 [2012] ECHR 868 (22 May 2012) May 23, 2012
-
UKHRB on Twitter
- Weekend catchup from Wessen Jazrawi- prisoner voting, Bratza's replacement and peaceful protest- human rights roundup ukhumanrightsblog.com/2012/05/27/pri… 3 hours ago
- #Prisonervotes is generating some strong and contrasting opinions- see Aitken v David and Straw: guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/… telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/la… 2 days ago
- Fresh on the blog by Reuven Ziegler: the case for letting prisoners vote ukhumanrightsblog.com/2012/05/24/the… 2 days ago
- New from @rosalindenglish- police denied TV footage of Dale Farm evictions ukhumanrightsblog.com/2012/05/24/pol… 3 days ago
- Prisoner votes ruling continuing to have political repercussions guardian.co.uk/law/2012/may/2… #prisonervotes 3 days ago
- SC: for Art 6 compliance, cts can, in exceptional circumstances, extend period for filing and serving notice of appeal #extradition 3 days ago
Adam Wagner on Twitter
- RT @MsLods: UK: Barrister who called opposing lawyers "slimebags" on twitter struck off. telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/la… (ping @journlaw) 32 minutes ago
- Is David Mitchell being serious or not? Human rights … or just an excuse for Strasbourg to tell Britain what to do? gu.com/p/37pfb/tw 2 hours ago
- Prisoner voting, Bratza's replacement and peaceful protest > this week's UK #humanrights roundup just posted wp.me/pJiO3-3Fb 2 hours ago
- It's here! @charonqc tells it as it is > UK Blawg Review #10 – Part 1 j.mp/JG8V4Y 6 hours ago
- Oh! Extraordinary goings on at Charles Taylor's war crimes trial... > More on the Removal of Judge Sow j.mp/LnNQH1 2 days ago
- RT @koldo_casla: One of the best pieces I´ve ever read on the case for letting prisoners vote - Reuven Ziegler wp.me/pJiO3-3F7 via ... 2 days ago
- Recent posts
- 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
- Police denied TV footage of Dale Farm evictions May 24, 2012 Rosalind English
- Time extended for appeals under Extradition Act May 23, 2012 Rosalind English
- Why no public appointment hearings for UK’s new European Court of Human Rights judge? May 23, 2012 Adam Wagner
- Don’t rely on human rights in a dismissal claim May 22, 2012 Martin Downs
- European Court of Human Rights retreats but doesn’t surrender on prisoner votes May 22, 2012 Adam Wagner
- Pssst… no secret hearings in naturalisation cases May 22, 2012 Isabel McArdle
Disclaimer
Police denied TV footage of Dale Farm evictions
Posted in Art. 10 | Freedom of Expression, Case comments, Case summaries, In the news, Politics / Public Order, tagged Dale Farm evictions, Freedom of Expression, Police, police investigations on May 24, 2012 | Leave a Comment »
BSkyB and another, R(on the application of) v Chelmsford Crown Court [2012] EWHC 1295 (Admin) – read judgment The police failed to satisfy the court that their need for footage taken by TV organisations was likely to be of substantial value to criminal investigations and therefore would be a justified interference with the rights of [...]
Read Full Post »