Buying time on prisoner votes – The Roundup

7 March 2011 by

It’s time for the human rights roundup, a regular bulletin of all the law we haven’t quite managed to feature in full blog posts. The full list of links, updated each day, can be found here.

by Graeme Hall

In the news:

Although prisoner voting appears to have taken a back seat this week, the Daily Mail has reported that the UK government has asked the European Court of Human Rights to refer the decision of Greens and MT v UK to the Grand Chamber. This judgment gave compensation to two prisoners because the UK had failed to implement the court’s decision in Hirst v UK (No. 2). According to the article, the government wants to refer this decision to the court’s appeal chamber because the issue of prisoner voting rights has now been debated in Parliament. See our previous post on Greens and MT v UK, as well as our most recent summary of the ongoing prisoner voting issue. A BBC programme about the Strasbourg court can be accessed via the ECHR blog.

However, as Reuters has reported, firmly in the front seat this week is the Court of Justice of the European Union’s judgment that discrimination on the basis of gender for insurance contracts will become illegal (see the ECJ’s press release).  The Human Rights in Ireland blog gives a concise overview of the decision and its background here. If you want to find out whether we think the judgment is “bonkers”, just click here.

Domestically, reporting on legal aid cuts continues. A BBC article looks at how and whether individuals should represent themselves in legal proceedings. While in the Guardian, Adam Wagner outlines the process of judicial review; a legal mechanism which is deployed increasingly to challenge the coalition’s budget cuts. Also, the High Court’s judgment that local councils are legally entitled to not approve potential foster carers who believe that homosexuality is immoral, has attracted a lot of press coverage. Alan Wilson, writing in the Guardian, takes a defiant stance on this issue, while James Wilson, writing on the A(nother) lawyer writes blog, acknowledges the complexity of such decisions.  Click here for our analysis.

And remember, we’re not the only legal blog, so why not check out other blogs such as Law Think. Or, for commentary on general legal matters, try Law and Lawyers.

In the courts:

Negassi, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWHC 386 (Admin) (04 March 2011): Asylum seeker not entitled to damages for being prevented from working even though UK failed to properly implement EU Directive (see our post on last year’s supreme court decision on asylum seekers’ right to work).

A Child v Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2011] EWHC 454 (QB) (04 March 2011): Identity of child in personal injury settlement decision not revealed, Mr Justice Tugendhat explains why (see Matthew Hill’s post on anonymity in proceedings involving children).

National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers v Serco Ltd (t/a Serco Docklands) [2011] EWCA Civ 226 (04 March 2011): Injunctions granted by High Court against 2 train workers strikes overturned by CoA. Mistakes in ballot were insufficient to invalidate strikes. Rosalind English will be posting on this later in the week.

BB, R (on the application of) v Special Immigration Appeals Commission & Anor [2011] EWHC 336 (Admin) (25 February 2011): Open justice: SIAC must give gist of case in bail proceedings even if already decided to deport on national security grounds. See Adam Wagner’s latest post on open justice. The big open justice news in the next few weeks will be the supreme court’s decision in the Al-Rawi case (see the UK Supreme Court Blog’s preview).

Allen v The Grimsby Telegrph & Anor [2011] EWHC 406 (QB) (2 March 2011): Sex offender fails to prevent Grimsby Telegraph publishing his name or details of Sexual Offences Prevention Order.

Ciaran TONER v the United Kingdom – 8195/08 [2011] ECHR 375 (15 February 2011): Northern Irish prisoner fails in Euro human rights challenge against refusal to allow him to vote as he missed voting registration deadline and was therefore too late in bringing claim. See Adam Wagner’s latest post on prisoner voting.

Johns & Anor, R (on the application of) v Derby City Council & Anor [2011] EWHC 375 (Admin) (28 February 2011): Local authority right to consider Christian couple’s  beliefs that homosexuality is wrong in denying them permission to foster children. See Rosalind English’s discussion of the issue, as well as this interesting article by a bishop in the Guardian.

…and don’t forget to take a look at our recent posts:


  1. Graeme Hall says:

    @John Hirst: you are of course right. Many thanks for the correction and apologies for the error.

  2. John Hirst says:

    You report that: “This judgment gave compensation to two prisoners because the UK had failed to implement the court’s decision in Hirst v UK (No. 2)”.

    However, Greens and MT were awarded costs and expenses but no damages/compensation.

    Greens has appealed to the Grand Chamber arguing that just satisfaction of winning the case may have been sufficient in Hirst v UK (No2) but given the UK’s unjustified delay in fully complying with the judgment it is argued damages shoulkd be made available.

Comments are closed.

Welcome to the UKHRB

This blog is run by 1 Crown Office Row barristers' chambers. Subscribe for free updates here. The blog's editorial team is:
Commissioning Editor: Jonathan Metzer
Editorial Team: Rosalind English
Angus McCullough QC David Hart QC
Martin Downs
Jim Duffy

Free email updates

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog for free and receive weekly notifications of new posts by email.




Aarhus Abortion Abu Qatada Abuse Access to justice adoption AI air pollution air travel ALBA Allergy Al Qaeda Amnesty International animal rights Animals Anne Sacoolas anonymity Article 1 Protocol 1 Article 2 article 3 Article 4 article 5 Article 6 Article 8 Article 9 article 10 Article 11 article 13 Article 14 article 263 TFEU Artificial Intelligence Asbestos Assange assisted suicide asylum asylum seekers Australia autism badgers benefits Bill of Rights biotechnology blogging Bloody Sunday brexit Bribery British Waterways Board care homes Catholic Church Catholicism Chagos Islanders Charter of Fundamental Rights child protection Children children's rights China christianity citizenship civil liberties campaigners civil partnerships climate change clinical negligence closed material procedure Coercion Commission on a Bill of Rights common law communications competition confidentiality consent conservation constitution contact order contact tracing contempt of court Control orders Copyright coronavirus coronavirus act 2020 costs costs budgets Court of Protection covid crime criminal law Cybersecurity Damages data protection death penalty defamation DEFRA deportation deprivation of liberty derogations Detention Dignitas diplomacy diplomatic relations disability disclosure Discrimination disease divorce DNA domestic violence duty of care ECHR ECtHR Education election Employment Environment Equality Act Equality Act 2010 Ethiopia EU EU Charter of Fundamental Rights EU costs EU law European Convention on Human Rights European Court of Human Rights European Court of Justice evidence extradition extraordinary rendition Facebook Facial Recognition Family Fatal Accidents Fertility FGM Finance foreign criminals foreign office foreign policy France freedom of assembly Freedom of Expression freedom of information freedom of speech Gay marriage gay rights Gaza Gender genetics Germany Google Grenfell Gun Control hague convention Harry Dunn Health HIV home office Housing HRLA human rights Human Rights Act human rights news Human Rights Watch Huntington's Disease immigration India Indonesia injunction Inquests insurance international law internet inuit Iran Iraq Ireland islam Israel Italy IVF ivory ban Japan joint enterprise judaism judicial review Judicial Review reform Julian Assange jury trial JUSTICE Justice and Security Bill Law Pod UK legal aid legal aid cuts Leveson Inquiry lgbtq liability Libel Liberty Libya lisbon treaty Lithuania local authorities marriage Media and Censorship mental capacity Mental Capacity Act Mental Health military Ministry of Justice modern slavery morocco murder music Muslim nationality national security naturism neuroscience NHS Northern Ireland nuclear challenges nuisance Obituary ouster clauses parental rights parliamentary expenses scandal patents Pensions Personal Injury physician assisted death Piracy Plagiarism planning planning system Poland Police Politics Pope press prison Prisoners prisoner votes Prisons privacy procurement Professional Discipline Property proportionality prosecutions prostituton Protection of Freedoms Bill Protest Public/Private public access public authorities public inquiries quarantine Radicalisation refugee rehabilitation Reith Lectures Religion RightsInfo right to die right to family life Right to Privacy right to swim riots Roma Romania round-up Round Up Royals Russia saudi arabia Scotland secrecy secret justice Secret trials sexual offence shamima begum Sikhism Smoking social media social workers South Africa Spain special advocates Sports Standing starvation statelessness stem cells stop and search Strasbourg super injunctions Supreme Court Supreme Court of Canada surrogacy surveillance sweatshops Syria Tax technology Terrorism The Round Up tort Torture travel treason treaty accession trial by jury TTIP Turkey Twitter UK Ukraine universal credit universal jurisdiction unlawful detention USA US Supreme Court vicarious liability Wales War Crimes Wars Weekly Round-up Welfare Western Sahara Whistleblowing Wikileaks wildlife wind farms WomenInLaw Worboys wrongful birth YearInReview Zimbabwe


This blog is maintained for information purposes only. It is not intended to be a source of legal advice and must not be relied upon as such. Blog posts reflect the views and opinions of their individual authors, not of chambers as a whole.

Our privacy policy can be found on our ‘subscribe’ page or by clicking here.

%d bloggers like this: