Film those pesky judges?.. The Human Rights Roundup

6 June 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:

Joshua Rozenberg, critical of the decision to appoint Jonathan Sumption QC to the Supreme Court, reports that Parliament is consulting on whether it should intervene in judicial appointments. Indeed, a Editorial has suggested that the best way for the judiciary to defend itself against accusations by Parliament of over-stepping its authority, is to make itself more diverse. Adam Wagner has previously blogged about the (lack of) diversity in the upper echelons of the judiciary and has also published a two-part series on the power of unelected judges here and here.

This comes against the backdrop of the First Minister of Scotland appointing a panel of experts to consider the future role of the Supreme Court within Scots law. Whilst The Economist has stated that Alex Salmond may have ulterior motives, a conclusion also remarked upon by blogger Charon QC, the decision to review the Supreme Court’s position comes in response to judgments which will substantially affect suspects’ access to lawyers (see Adam Wagner’s post), as well as the quashing of Scottish convictions (see Rosalind English’s post).

Further, in a detailed discussion of the Court of Appeal’s decision which found that Sharon Shoesmith was unlawfully dismissed, the Law and Lawyers blog also picks up on the current tension between Parliament and the judiciary, arguing that the judiciary must reaffirm its place as a reviewer of ministerial decisions. The Fighting Monsters AMHP blog offers a social worker’s opinion on Shoesmith’s sacking which, whilst supportive of the Court’s decision, is not necessarily supportive of Shoesmith, herself.

Judith Townsend, writing on Inforrm’s blog, attempts to get to the bottom of the number of Super-Injunctions granted by the courts. James Wilson, writing for the Halsbury’s Law Exchange blog, concludes that whatever our feelings about the protection of celebrities’ private lives, the deliberate disregard of court injunctions is ultimately damaging to the rule of law. A further piece on Inforrm’s blog, develops the privacy debate by considering the justifications for State surveillance.

At a time when the UK Border Agency has reportedly granted an amnesty to thousands of asylum seekers, the Free Movement blog summarizes the “depressing” ‘Lives in the Balance’ Report by the Refugee Council. As well as highlighting dubious practices by legal advisors, the report concludes that separated children in asylum cases receive legal representation of, at best, questionable quality.

Finally, has published some interesting articles questioning whether, following the roll out out Supreme Court Live (currently in recess until Wednesday), more court hearings should be broadcast live: See Should TV cameras be allowed inside UK law courts?by James Robinson  and Cameras in court: trial by boredom? by David Banks.

Another succinct roundup of legal news can be found on ObiterJ’s blog: Law and Lawyers.

In the courts:

RG v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions and North Wiltshire District Council (HB) [2011] UKUT 198 (AAC) (05 May 2011): Failure to provide family with enough housing benefit to give disabled daughters separate bedrooms not breach of human rights

Parker Rhodes Hickmotts Solicitors v The Legal Services Commission [2011] EWHC 1323 (Admin) (25 May 2011): Immigration solicitor fails in challenge to Legal Aid contract – “sad” but could have done more to get application points

R v Lord John Taylor (MP expenses) – Sentencing remarks of Mr Justice Saunders

R. AND H. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM – 35348/06 [2011] ECHR 844 (31 May 2011): Order that Northern Irish child be “freed” from family for adoption not breach of parents’ human rights. 2-stage process where child first freed & then adoptive parents found was appropriate.

E.G. v. THE UNITED KINGDOM – 41178/08 [2011] ECHR 846 (31 May 2011): Asylum seeker’s political affiliations and war scarring not likely to lead to detention & ill-treatment if sent back to Sri Lanka

Shoesmith, R (on the application of) v OFSTED & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 642 (27 May 2011): Direction under Education Act 1996 to remove Director of Children’s Services was unlawful as did not follow fair procedure

Bashir, R (on the application of) v The Independent Adjudicator [2011] EWHC 1108 (Admin): Prison rules conviction for failure to provide urine sample quashed as Muslim prisoner legitimately fasting before court appearance. Article 9 breached

…and remember to take a look at our recent posts:

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


  1. James Wilson says:

    All very spirited responses. Had each taken the time to read in full what I have written on the subject of privacy law they would know I am not much of a fan of the state of the present law, and believe that too little emphasis is given to freedom of speech.

    I also agree, as it happens, that there is a place for civil disobedience (a very learned commentator has put something to this effect under an earlier injunction blog I wrote (, though the celebrity injunction saga isn’t exactly of a piece with the civil rights movement in the US in the 1960s. Public figures seeking injunctions about their own freely chosen actions raise rather different issues to private individuals in family court proceedings too …

  2. We couldn’t agree more with Norman Scarth.

    Law and order in Britain is now a matter of process and procedure; court officials are allowed to flout the laws; the CPS, with dirty hands, collude with government departments; witness tampering and threatening is allowed to carry on; court assigned management receivers when caught stealing funds from liquidated assets are not pursued.

    Judges are simply blokes in a wig that sit on the fence trying to get through the day without any controversy; they work hand in hand with other government agencies to deny justice to the common man and if you can’t afford to buy justice for yourself then you are in deep trouble because there is no one there to help you when the machine is set in motion against you.

    Lawful rebellion has been enabled by the actions of peers and a great many people are regularly becoming aware of what this really means to them; the Magna Carta is alive and well, Common Law still exists despite the piles of legislation that has tried to hide it from sight; human rights issues remain important and when our courts seek to circumnavigate those rights, they can expect only one reaction from the people … lawful rebellion.

  3. maggiee tuttle says:

    As a grandmother fighting for the rights of my grandsons rights and to have his voice heard, I have come up against ??? council and social services, who are investergating my 36 years as a voice for people and as a campaigner, also having been the founder of a very big charity, they are running scared because they know I will bring out the truth of their lies and deceit, in taking children from loving homes and selling them to the adoption and foster agencies.
    Now the court has placed a Gagging order on me, and stated I must speak to no one, not even John Hemming or my MP. They are all desperate to shut me up, and from the sounds of all the public to.
    I have written to Mr Cameron and to the Queen stating that as I have written to them, I am now in contempt of court and face a prison sentence.
    So our courts now have all rights over the MPs Lords and the two heads of state.
    I could become a catholic and speak to the preist.

  4. “… the deliberate disregard of court injunctions is ultimately damaging to the rule of law” says the piece above.
    Like Hell it is! What IS damaging to the ‘Rule of Law’ is that arrogant judges think they are God Almighty, the legal profession & so-called ‘News Media’ promoting them as such. A little humility from these ‘Gods’ would not come amiss. It is our DUTY to disobey bad laws. Equally so bad gagging orders. It is great that John Hemming, Twitterers & others have the courage to do so. The gagging of procedings in the Family Courts is SUPPOSEDLY ‘to protect the Children’. Poppycock! On the contrary, the secrecy allows great harm to be done to them by people who have ulterior motives & abuse their power. The sexual pecadillos of ‘Celebrities’ are of no consequence whatever, but their ‘Super-Injuctions’ have given the opportunity for brave people to tell these arrogant judges ‘Get Stuffed’. Let’s have more of it. Twice when in court I have been threatened with ‘Contempt’. On each occasion I said loudly & clearly “I have the utmost contempt for you AND this court”. Neither judge did anything about it – apart from underlining the black mark against my name!

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.




7/7 Bombings 9/11 A1P1 Aarhus Abortion Abu Qatada Abuse Access to justice adoption AI air pollution air travel ALBA Allergy Al Qaeda Amnesty International animal rights Animals 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 birds directive blogging Bloody Sunday brexit Bribery British Waterways Board Catholic Church Catholicism Chagos Islanders Charter of Fundamental Rights child protection Children children's rights China christianity circumcision citizenship civil liberties campaigners civil partnerships climate change clinical negligence closed material procedure Coercion Cologne Commission on a Bill of Rights common buzzard common law communications competition confidentiality confiscation order conscientious objection consent conservation constitution contact order contempt of court Control orders Copyright coronavirus costs costs budgets Court of Protection crime criminal law Criminal Legal Aid criminal records Cybersecurity Damages data protection death penalty declaration of incompatibility defamation DEFRA Democracy village deportation deprivation of liberty derogations Detention devolution Dignitas dignity Dignity in Dying diplomacy director of public prosecutions disability Disability-related harassment disciplinary hearing disclosure Discrimination Discrimination law disease divorce DNA doctors does it matter? domestic violence Dominic Grieve don't ask don't ask don't tell don't tell Doogan and Wood double conviction DPP guidelines drones duty of care ECHR economic and social rights economic loss ECtHR Education election Employment Environment environmental information Equality Act Equality Act 2010 ethics 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 european disability forum European Sanctions Blog Eurozone euthanasia evidence Exclusion extra-jurisdictional reach of ECHR extra-territoriality extradition extradition act extradition procedures extradition review extraordinary rendition Facebook Facebook contempt facial recognition fair procedures Fair Trial faith courts fake news Family family courts family law family legal aid Family life fatal accidents act Fertility fertility treatment FGM fisheries fishing rights foreign criminals foreign office foreign policy France freedom of assembly Freedom of Association Freedom of Expression freedom of information Freedom of Information Act 2000 freedom of movement freedom of speech free speech game birds gangbo gang injunctions Garry Mann gary dobson Gary McFarlane gay discrimination Gay marriage gay rights gay soldiers Gaza Gaza conflict Gender General Dental Council General Election General Medical Council genetic discrimination genetic engineering genetic information genetics genetic testing Google government Grenfell grooming Gun Control gwyneth paltrow gypsies habitats habitats protection Halsbury's Law Exchange hammerton v uk happy new year harassment Hardeep Singh Haringey Council Harkins and Edwards Health healthcare health insurance Heathrow heist heightened scrutiny Henry VII Henry VIII herd immunity hereditary disorder High Court of Justiciary Hirst v UK HIV HJ Iran HM (Iraq) v The Secretary of state for the home department [2010] EWCA Civ 1322 Holder holkham beach holocaust homelessness Home Office Home Office v Tariq homeopathy hooding Hounslow v Powell House of Commons Housing housing benefits Howard League for Penal Reform how judges decide cases hra damages claim Hrant Dink HRLA HS2 hs2 challenge hts Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority human genome human rights Human Rights Act Human Rights Act 1998 human rights advocacy Human rights and the UK constitution human rights commission human rights conventions human rights damages Human Rights Day human rights decisions Human Rights Information Project human rights news Human Rights Watch human right to education human trafficking hunting Huntington's Disease HXA hyper injunctions Igor Sutyagin illegality defence immigration Immigration/Extradition Immigration Act 2014 immigration appeals immigration detention immigration judge immigration rules immunity increase of sanction India Indonesia Infrastructure Planning Committee inherent jurisdiction inherited disease Inhuman and degrading treatment injunction Inquest Inquests insult insurance insurmountable obstacles intelligence services act intercept evidence interception interests of the child interim remedies international international conflict international criminal court international humanitarian law international human rights international human rights law international law international treaty obligations internet internet service providers internment internship inuit investigation investigative duty in vitro fertilisation Iran iranian bank sanctions Iranian nuclear program Iraq Iraqi asylum seeker Iraq War Ireland irrationality islam Israel Italy iTunes IVF ivory ban jackson reforms Janowiec and Others v Russia ( Japan Jason Smith Jeet Singh Jefferies Jeremy Corbyn jeremy hunt job Jogee John Hemming John Terry joint enterprise joint tenancy Jon Guant Joseph v Spiller journalism judaism judges Judges and Juries judging Judicial activism judicial brevity judicial deference judicial review Judicial Review reform judiciary Julian Assange jurisdiction jury trial JUSTICE Justice and Security Act Justice and Security Bill Justice and Security Green Paper Justice Human Rights Awards JUSTICE Human Rights Awards 2010 just satisfaction Katyn Massacre Kay v Lambeth Kay v UK Ken Clarke Ken Pease Kerry McCarthy Kettling Kings College Klimas koran burning Labour Lady Hale lansley NHS reforms LASPO Law Commission Law Pod UK Law Society Law Society of Scotland leave to enter leave to remain legal aid legal aid cuts Legal Aid desert Legal Aid Reforms legal blogs Legal Certainty legal naughty step Legal Ombudsman legal representation legitimate expectation let as a dwelling Leveson Inquiry Levi Bellfield lewisham hospital closure lgbtq liability Libel libel reform Liberal Democrat Conference Liberty libraries closure library closures Libya licence conditions licence to shoot life insurance life sentence life support limestone pavements limitation lisbon treaty Lithuania Litigation litvinenko live exports local authorities locked in syndrome london borough of merton London Legal Walk London Probation Trust Lord Bingham Lord Bingham of Cornhill Lord Blair Lord Goldsmith lord irvine Lord Judge speech Lord Kerr Lord Lester Lord Neuberger Lord Phillips Lord Rodger Lord Sumption Lord Taylor LSC tender luftur rahman machine learning MAGA Magna Carta mail on sunday Majority Verdict Malcolm Kennedy malice Margaret Thatcher Margin of Appreciation margin of discretion Maria Gallastegui marriage material support maternity pay Matthew Woods Mattu v The University Hospitals of Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust [2011] EWHC 2068 (QB) Maya the Cat Mba v London Borough Of Merton McKenzie friend Media and Censorship Medical medical liability medical negligence medical qualifications medical records medicine mental capacity Mental Capacity Act Mental Capacity Act 2005 Mental Health mental health act mental health advocacy mental health awareness Mental Health Courts Mental illness merits review MGN v UK michael gove Midwives migrant crisis Milly Dowler Ministerial Code Ministry of Justice Ministry of Justice cuts misfeasance in public office modern slavery morality morocco mortuaries motherhood Motor Neurone disease Moulton Mousa MP expenses Mr Gul Mr Justice Eady MS (Palestinian Territories) (FC) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Home Department murder murder reform Musician's Union Muslim NADA v. SWITZERLAND - 10593/08 - HEJUD [2012] ECHR 1691 naked rambler Naomi Campbell nationality National Pro Bono Week national security Natural England nature conservation naturism Nazi negligence Neuberger neuroscience Newcastle university news News of the World new Supreme Court President NHS NHS Risk Register Nick Clegg Nicklinson Niqaab Noise Regulations 2005 Northern Ireland nuclear challenges nuisance nursing nursing home Obituary Occupy London offensive jokes Offensive Speech offensive t shirt oil spill olympics open justice oppress OPQ v BJM orchestra Osama Bin Laden Oxford University paramountcy principle parental rights parenthood parking spaces parliamentary expenses parliamentary expenses scandal Parliamentary sovereignty Parliament square parole board passive smoking pastor Terry Jones patents Pathway Students Patrick Quinn murder Pensions persecution personal data Personal Injury personality rights perversity Peter and Hazelmary Bull PF and EF v UK Phil Woolas phone hacking phone taps physical and mental disabilities physician assisted death Pinnock Piracy Plagiarism planning planning human rights planning system plebgate POCA podcast points Poland Police police investigations police liability police misconduct police powers police surveillance Policy Exchange report political judges Politics Politics/Public Order poor reporting Pope Pope's visit Pope Benedict portal possession proceedings power of attorney PoW letters to ministers pre-nup pre-nuptial Pre-trial detention predator control pregnancy press press briefing press freedom Prince Charles prince of wales princess caroline of monaco principle of subsidiarity prior restraint prison Prisoners prisoners rights prisoners voting prisoner vote prisoner votes prisoner voting prison numbers Prisons prison vote privacy privacy injunction privacy law through the front door Private life private nuisance private use proceeds of crime Professional Discipline Property proportionality prosecution Protection of Freedoms Act Protection of Freedoms Bill Protest protest camp protest rights Protocol 15 psychiatric hospitals Public/Private public access publication public authorities Public Bodies Bill public inquiries public interest public interest environmental litigation public interest immunity Public Order Public Sector Equality Duty putting the past behind quango quantum quarantine Queen's Speech queer in the 21st century R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 895 R (on the application of) v The General Medical Council [2013] EWHC 2839 (Admin) R (on the application of EH) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWHC 2569 (Admin) R (on the application of G) v The Governors of X School Rabone and another v Pennine Care NHS Foundation Trust [2012] UKSC 2 race relations Rachel Corrie Radmacher Raed Salah Mahajna Raed Saleh Ramsgate raptors rehabilitation Reith Lectures Religion resuscitation RightsInfo right to die right to family life right to life Right to Privacy right to swim riots Roma Romania Round Up Royals Russia saudi arabia Scotland secrecy secret justice Secret trials security services sexual offence Sikhism Smoking social media social workers South Africa south african constitution Spain special advocates spending cuts Standing starvation statelessness stem cells stop and search Strasbourg super injunctions Supreme Court Supreme Court of Canada surrogacy surveillance swine flu Syria Tax Taxi technology Terrorism terrorism act tort Torture travel treason treaty accession trial by jury TTIP Turkey Twitter UK Ukraine unfair consultation universal jurisdiction unlawful detention USA US Supreme Court vaccination vicarious liability Wales War Crimes Wars 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: