Bite-size human rights case law update

14 December 2010 by Adam Wagner

You may have noticed that we have started to provide a bit more detail in the “Latest news” and “Case law” sections on the right sidebar.

This is so we can provide quicker news updates, and can notify readers of cases before we have had a chance to post on them in more detail. You can access the full list (RSS – for those who know what that means) of news updates here, or case law here.

The recent cases are:

• O’ DONOGHUE AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM – 34848/07 [2010] ECHR 2022 (14 December 2010)
• “Certificate of Approval” permission to marry scheme for those subject to immigration control breached human right to marriage (and other rights), in all three versions – Euro Court of Human Rights. It appears that the UK scheme, which has been substantially altered as a result of critical judgments, may soon be scrapped in any event.

• Agnes OFULUE v the United Kingdom – 52512/09 [2010] ECHR 2014 (23 November 2010) December 13, 2010
  Couple who lost £550,000 property to adverse possessors fail in Euro human rights court: letter claiming ownership headed “without prejudice” could not be relied upon. The Nearly Legal blog has already posted on this.
• PF and EF v the United Kingdom – 28326/09 [2010] ECHR 2015 (23 November 2010) December 13, 2010
  European Court of Human Rights rejects claim that 2001 failure of police in Belfast to protect parents walking children to school was breach of human rights. Another case showing that it is almost impossible to sue the police for negligence, as the courts are of the view (following the principle in Osman v UK) that the police should be able to get on with their jobs without fear of civil litigation.
• Secretary of State for the Home Department v DD (Afghanistan) [2010] EWCA Civ 1407 (10 December 2010) December 10, 2010
  Asylum seeker not protected from deportation as he had carried out acts contrary to the principles of the United Nations. It is a standard feature of the Refugee Convention that asylum seekers are no protected if they were part of the problem in their home country, for example if they were a willing part of a persecutory regime. The interesting aspect is that he was carrying out actions he said (and the court basically agreed) were approved by the UN in the first place.
• Ministry of Defence v AB & Ors [2010] EWCA Civ 1405 (09 December 2010)December 9, 2010
  Nuclear test veterans refused permission to appeal to Supreme Court in compensation case. The original decision is here: The Court of Appeal overturned the High Court’s support of the veterans’ case that they should be able to bring the claims well outside of the usual limitation period for personal injury claims.

• SEAL v. THE UNITED KINGDOM – 50330/07 [2010] ECHR 1976 (7 December 2010) December 8, 2010
  European Court of Human Rights: Strike out of civil claim against police re alleged assault & false imprisonment did not breach fair trial rights.

Sign up to free human rights updates by email, Facebook, Twitter or RSS