Failure to stop disability harassment is inhuman treatment, rules Strasbourg

26 September 2012 by

Attitudes changing, slowly

DORDEVIC v. CROATIA – 41526/10 – HEJUD [2012] ECHR 1640 – read judgment

The European Court of Human Rights has declared in Đorđević v Croatia that the failure of the Croatian State to prevent the persistent harassment of a severely disabled young man was a breach of his Article 3 ECHR right not to be subjected to torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

It also amounted to a breach of his mother’s Article 8 ECHR right to respect for her family and private life.  The applicants had no effective remedy in the domestic courts in breach of Article 13 ECHR.

This is an important judgment on the protection from harassment that the State must ensure for disabled people and their families.

Factual Background

The first applicant, Dalibor Đorđević is a man in his mid-30s who lacks legal capacity owing to his severe physical and mental disabilities and is cared for by the second applicant, his mother Radmila Đorđević [§6].  Dalibor had developed a variety of physical impairments as a result of a childhood illness, including epilepsy, very poor eyesight, severe foot deformation and a painful spine [§6].  He was dependent on his mother for basic daily care.

Dalibor and Radmila lived in a ground-floor flat in Zagreb, close to a primary school.  Between July 2008 and February 2011 they were subjected to persistent harassment by pupils from the school [§8]. The harassment was motivated by Dalibor’s disability and both applicants’ Serbian origin and was aimed primarily at Dalibor.

Most of the incidents involved low-level insidious psychological harassment.  A group of children would come daily to the park in front of the applicants’ flat, shout obscenities and spit at Dalibor and write insulting messages on the pavement [§8]. They had thrown water over Dalibor [§19].   The applicants’ balcony was covered in snow [§35], chocolate milk [§26]; mud [§26] and the flower beds torn up [§9];  their door was urinated on [§26]; a stone was thrown at their window [§50] and their living room window completely covered in saliva [§55].  Children would make lewd comments [§44]; whilst other comments were made using the Serbian dialect alluding to the applicants’ Serbian origins [§44]. The children had admitted to their headmaster that they had done a number of “brutal acts” including making derogatory remarks, swearing and acting provocatively, burning his hands and taking Dalibor’s ball [§24]

By 2009, the incidents had escalated to physical violence: on 4 April 2009 Dalibor was burned on his hands with cigarettes [§12];  on 14 September 2009 he was pushed and insulted [§26]; during that winter he was hit with snowballs “without mercy” [§29]; on 11 April 2010 he was hit on the nose with a ball [§32] and on 13 May 2010 Dalibor was pushed against an iron fence, causing him to fall and hit his head [§33].

The harassment had a debilitating effect on Dalibor: he was reported to be deeply upset, to be suffering from constant anxiety and a feeling of being persecuted [§30].  Psychotherapy was recommended [§28].   After one incident, he was withdrawn and uncommunicative for three days [§33].  His doctor described him as a peaceful and benign person who could not and did not know how to defend himself from the abusers [§12]. As a result of the stress arising from the harassment, Dalibor often bit his lips and fists, had a twitch in his left eye and suffered from psoriasis [§60].  A medical report dated March 2011 stated that it was  necessary to move Dalibor to a calm and friendly environment [§60].

Radmila had reported the harassment on numerous occasions to the authorities, including the social services, the police, the Ombudswoman for Persons with Disabilities and the school [§26].  The authorities did respond to reported incidents but only inadequately.  The police were frequently summoned to the flat [§21] but arrived late or simply told the children to go away.  Nevertheless, certain named children were  interviewed [§14-15];  the police offered to patrol the street more frequently [§19]; whilst the headmaster wrote to the parents of children at the school to ask them to speak to their children about their behaviour towards Dalibor [§24].

The children were, however, below the age of criminal responsibility so no criminal prosecution could be brought against them [§20].  Consequently in May 2010, the Zagreb Municipality State Attorney’s Office stated it had no jurisdiction [§38]; the Ombudsman for Children also considered that she had no jurisdiction [§40]; whilst the headmaster informed the applicants’ lawyer that the school authorities had taken all measures that they considered appropriate [§39].   There was no sustained or integrated approach by the authorities to the systematic and incessant harassment.

Harassment met threshold for Article 3 and Article 8 protection

The Croatian government had argued that the requisite level of severity for Article 3 had not been reached since the harassment complained of had mostly been verbal whilst the injuries that Dalibor had sustained on 4 April 2009 had been of a mild nature [§81].   Croatia also argued, rather extraordinarily, that since Dalibor had continued to want to walk around outside the apartment, he could not be traumatised by the events in issue [§81].

Croatia also argued that Dalibor had not exhausted all available domestic remedies since, under Croatian domestic law, the applicants could have brought a civil action against the children and parents of the children concerned, or against the school or other authorities; alternatively they could have instituted a private prosecution for minor offences against the children’s parents [§82].   A further remedy that was said to be available was an “action against an unlawful act” against the relevant authorities, which the Croatian courts would have been obliged to adjudicate urgently [§82]. Criminal investigations were said to still be pending against two of the children who were over the age of 14 [§83].

The Court rejected these arguments.  The Court treated the repeated episodes of violent behaviour towards the first applicant by a group of children over a long period of time as a continuing situation of ongoing harassment [§90] and noted that both the incidents of harassment and their effect on Dalibor’s health were well-documented [§91].  Consequently,the State had a positive obligation to protect Dalibor from the violent behaviour of the children involved under both Article 3 and 8, although it analysed Dalibor’s complaint in respect of Article 3 only.

The Court affirmed that ill-treatment must attain a minimum level of severity and this assessment depends on all the circumstances of the case, such as the nature and sex, age and state of health of the victim [§94].  Treatment is ‘inhuman’ when it is applied for hours at a stretch and caused either actual bodily injury or intense physical and mental suffering [§95]; whilst treatment is ‘degrading’ when it was such as to arouse in its victims feelings of fear, anguish and inferiority capable of humiliating and debasing them [§95].

The Court considered that the harassment of Dalibor, which on one occasion caused him physical injuries, combined with feelings of fear and helplessness, was sufficiently serious to invoke the protection of Article 3 [§96].

Radmila had not been exposed to any form of violence.  Nevertheless, incidents caused disruption to her daily life, and had an adverse effect on her private and family life, and thus Article 8 was applicable [§98].

The applicants had not failed to exhaust their domestic remedies.   The existence of remedies that are effective must be sufficiently certain not only in theory but also in practice, so they must be accessible and capable of providing redress [§99 -100].  The issue was not one concerning the individual responsibility of the parents for the children involved but the lack of an adequate State response to acts of harassment by children who could not be criminally prosecuted [§103]; whilst individual criminal responsibility was not at issue [§104].  The State had failed to show that it had taken effective steps to prosecute those children who were old enough to be prosecuted [§104].

Fundamentally, the State had not indicated which State body could be held to be responsible for the failure to take adequate measures and the suggested public law remedy could only be brought against an individual public official who had a duty to act with a basis in law – and it would be difficult to name such an individual official [§107].  The situation called for an immediate reaction by the State authorities, and Croatia had not shown that any of the remedies available would have led to such a response [§108].

The complaint that the applicants had been discriminated against on the grounds of the Serbian ethnicity and/or the first applicant’s disability was, however, not admissible as the applicants had not exhausted domestic remedies.

Breach of Article 3 and 8

The ECtHR reiterated that Article 3 requires States to take measures designed to ensure that individuals are not subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment and these measures should provide effective protection of children and other vulnerable persons, including taking reasonable steps to prevent ill-treatment [§138].  The ECtHR was mindful that this should not impose an impossible or disproportionate burden on the authorities [§139] so not every claimed risk of ill-treatement will entail a Convention requirement to take operational measures.

This case was to be distinguished from the obligation of a state to conduct a thorough, effective and independent investigation into criminal acts since few of the acts complained of amounted to a criminal offence as most of the children were below the age of criminal liability [§142].   The incidents of harassment were nevertheless incompatible with Article 3 [§142] and the State was under an obligation, outside the sphere of criminal law, to respond to a situation of violence and harassment [§143].

In the circumstances, competent State agencies were fully aware of the ongoing harassment of Dalibor [§146], but failed to take sufficient steps to ascertain the extent of the problem and to prevent further abuse taking place [§147].   The ECtHR found that:

no serious attempt was made to assess the true nature of the situation complained of, and to assess the lack of a systematic approach which resulted in the absence of adequate and comprehensive measures”  [§148].

The lack of any concrete action, the absence of the involvement of social services or any experts who could have worked with the children were noted [§148], as was the fact that Dalibor had not been provided with counselling.  The ECtHR noted that:

apart from responses to specific incidents, no relevant action of a general nature to combat the underlying problem has been taken by the competent authorities despite their knowledge that the first applicant had been systematically targeted and that future abuse was very likely to follow’ [§148]

Consequently, in breach of Article 3 the State had failed to take all reasonable measures to prevent abuse against Dalibor, notwithstanding the fact that the continuing risk of such abuse was real and foreseeable [§149].

Similarly, Croatia had failed to take all adequate and relevant measures to protect the family and private life of Radmila [§153] in breach of Article 8.

As the applicants had no effective remedy that would have addressed their situation, there had also been a breach of the Article 13 right to an effective remedy before a national authority [§167 -168].

Dalibor and Radmila were jointly awarded 11,500 EUR plus 4,706 EUR in respect of costs.

Comment

This decision is an important and welcome protection for disabled people from hate crime.

In recent years, the tragic effects of disability hate crime and repeated failures by the relevant authorities to protect disabled people have become all too evident.  Evidence in the inquest into the deaths of Fiona Pilkington and Francecca Hardwick indicated that both errors and inaction of the police and otther authorities in the face of years of abuse from youths had contributed to driving a vulnerable single mother to kill herself and her severely disabled daughter.

The facts of the application to the ECtHR of X. Y and Z  v UK reveal the potential for a dangerous escalation from harassment and bullying to severe physical and sexual violence when the authorities fail to act.  The applicants in that case, represented by Leigh Day & Co solicitors and members of 1 Crown Office Rowsettled with the UK government before a full hearing.  It appears likely, in the light of Dordevic, that the applicants in X,Y and Z v UK would have succeeded.

United Response. a charity that supports people with learning disabilities, mental health needs, and physical disabilities, gives this example of the practical effect of disability hate crime on the lives of disabled people:

we run a drop in centre in London where people with learning disabilities meet to socialise and learn new skills. This centre is open until 5 and is normally teeming with activity, but at 3pm there is a sudden exodus. The reason: everyone wants to make their way home before children get out of school and taunt them on public transport.”

Persistent harassment can be difficult to police and the necessary protection will often require coordinated action from a variety of government agencies.  The Court specifically commented on the failure of the various Croatian State bodies to adopt a coherent and strategic approach.  Disabled people often fall between the cracks between agencies.  An inquest into the death of David Askew found that he had been harassed because of his learning disabilities for over 30 years and had been unlawfully killed after an altercation with youths contributed to his death.  The Coroner commented that in dealing with the anti-social behaviour towards Mr Askew the police, the local authority and various housing associations had shown a:

staggering degree of inertia and complacency”

Kier Starmer QC,  Director of Public Prosecutions, last year affirmed the Crown Prosecution Service’s commitment to prosecuting disability hate crimes, stating:

Disability hate crime strikes at all disabled people by undermining their sense of safety and security in the community. For this reason disability hate crime should be regarded as particularly serious. Such crimes are based on ignorance, prejudice, discrimination and hate and they have no place in an open and democratic society.”

Figures published by the Association of Chief Police Officers for 2011 report 1,788 recorded incidents of disability hate crime in England and Wales, an increase of more than 18% on the total for 2010.  There were 523 convictions.  The majority of disability hate crimes involve violence against the person.   There is no specific offence of inciting hatred based on disability, in marked contrast to inciting hatred based on race, religion or sexual orientation. Sections 145 and 146 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, however, place a duty on courts to increase the sentence for any offence shown to be motivated by hostility based upon (inter alia) the victim’s actual or presumed disability or for any offence where a defendant demonstrated hostility based upon the victim’s actual or presumed disability.It is widely believed that many incidents go unreported.

The issue of vulnerability as an aggravating factor for sentencing is a complex and challenging one.  A disabled person should not be automatically and necessarily considered to be vulnerable. To assume ‘vulnerability” is an inherent and unchanging characteristic of disabled people is to discriminate against them, is disempowering and sails close to a flawed conceptualisation of disability as weakness.

Such an approach also invites the kind of (in my view, appalling) arguments that were run by the Croatian State  that Dalibor had engaged in risky behaviour in light of his own vulnerability by going (or his mother had failed in caring for him by allowing him to go) outside on his own [§130].  The CPS Guidance on the distinction between hostility and vulnerability in disability hate crime states that:

A disabled person is not vulnerable/easy target per se. It is the particular situation in which they may find themselves and which is then exploited that makes them vulnerable to be targeted for some types of criminal offences.”

The focus should be on the situation, rather than the person and a fact-specific, nuanced approach is required.

This judgment is a useful tool for those advocating for better protection for disabled people.  As the European Disability Forum argued in its intervention in this case, disability hate crime has to date not received enough attention from law-makers and law-enforcement authorities [§136].    A denial by any single agency or multiple agencies of responsibility, without an attempt to provide protection can now be argued to be a breach of the Human Rights Act 1998.

Let us hope that this judgment will provide a mechanism for disabled people to be able to invoke the necessary protection, but we also need to think about our attitudes towards disability.  One hope for the London 2012 Paralympic Games was that it would change negative attitudes towards disabled people.  The reported results of a survey commissioned by the Charities Aid Foundation before the Games showed that three quarters of those surveyed believed that  people with disabilities often experience prejudice or discrimination in society, whilst 41 per cent of people suggested that the UK Government could do more to help.

The Games were a fantastic demonstration of some of the many achievements of disabled people, but were also a reminder of the extant problems with rights, infrastructure and opportunities for disabled people globally.   In a recent article on the legacy of the Paralympic Games, Katharine Quarmby stated:

Therefore, my first wish for the legacy of the Paralympics is that we confront the historical roots of our attitudes towards disability. If we do not understand where our attitudes come from we will never be able to reform ourselves or indeed the perpetrators of hate crime, who take those attitudes to their logical end and attack disabled people”

Further information and advice on stopping disability hate crime is available here and here; whilst training on the issue is available for both the public and private sector here.

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

Related posts:

10 comments


  1. Elise says:

    http://www.cbs8.com/story/19604621/2-men-accused-of-abusing-autistic-man-plead-not-guilty United States seeing alarming increase in abuse against severely autistic individuals.

  2. […] can read a full account here UK Human Rights Blog . If you choose to do so, look out for some of the following as examples of social or […]

  3. leeleegtm says:

    Yet more positive obligations from Strasbourg to spend taxpayers’ money.

  4. Thanks for a great post – that anecdote from United Response is really powerful. On Hounslow, I’ve long thought that was a peculiar and badly decided case. I’m not sure why the HRA claim was dropped in the Court of Appeal (?), but either way it’s really strange that the Court of Appeal placed so much reliance on the Bedfordshire case when it was so heavily criticised in the ECtHR. Yet the ECtHR decision (Z and Others v United Kingdom (Application No. 29392/95) [2001] ECHR 333; (2002) 34 EHRR 3) wasn’t even mentioned by the Court of Appeal in Hounslow. I’ve wondered whether the proposed ‘duty to co-operated’ under the Adult Social Care bill would create the kind of ‘duty to communicate’ which the CoA found did not exist in the Hounslow case.

    Either way, this is a great ruling. Let’s hope it prompts some change…

  5. Tim says:

    The UK government is not only failing to protect disabled people from harassment but are actively colluding with the right-wing press to stir up hatred against disabled people:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/dec/04/ian-birrell-prejudice-against-disabled

  6. Michael Bater says:

    You could argue that the ATOS judgements also contravene this ruling

  7. M.Hill says:

    Too right, Chris. I am severly disabled, have had milk, butter, & ftuit juice stolen from doorstep, flowers cut from garden & used condoms & beer cans thrown in, special valves stolen from disability vehicle, & motorbike ridden throgh garden wall. A security video has revealed culprits, but police do NOTHING,
    Anybody, any ideas?

  8. Chris says:

    I look forward to the day when the police & other local authorities are brought to account for their failure to protect disabled people from the local thugs. As was the recent case that the poor mother and her disabled daughter committed suicide after years of harassment

  9. Rosemary Cantwell says:

    “The CPS Guidance on the distinction between hostility and vulnerability in disability hate crime states that:

    A disabled person is not vulnerable/easy target per se. It is the particular situation in which they may find themselves and which is then exploited that makes them vulnerable to be targeted for some types of criminal offences.”

    The focus should be on the situation, rather than the person and a fact-specific, nuanced approach is required.”

    I wholly endorse this, and it is enshrined in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 where people who might be vulnerable are supposed to be given maximum opportunity to make their own decisions.

    But herein lies the essential question – who determines who is “at risk” and what is vulnerability?

    For there are so many varieties of “risk” and “risky behaviour”. Just look at the Bankers who broke the World Economy – do we bring them to account – literally and metaphysically?

    Or is it one rule for one and another for eveyone else?

    I ask moral questions but have no answers.

  10. M. says:

    I can think of several cases of harassment of non-disabled people by children under 10 in London that have led to suicide attempts – not by virtue of colour or gender or disability, but , e.g. because they had set up Neighbourhood Watch groups – all they are advised to do by the Police is move – I wonder if these people would be protected under Art. 3, ,or referred back to ‘exhaust local remedies’..or simply screened out?

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.

Subscribe

Categories


Tags


#50cases #catgate #fighthatewithhumanrights #lawblogs 7/7 7/7 bombing 7/7 inquest 7/7 inquests 9/11 100 years of women in law 1688 bill of rights 2010 General Election 2012 in review 2012 year in review 2017 @Iamspartacus a1p1 a1p1 breach A1P1 damages Aarhus Aarhus Convention A B and C abbas hall Abid Naseer ablyazov abortion Absent Witness Abu Hamza abu qatada abuse of dominant position abuse of private information abuse of process academic freedom access to courts access to information Access to justice accountability acoustic shock acquired disorder AC v Berkshire Addison Lee Adetoro v United Kingdom adjudication administrative law admissability criteria adoption adoption orders advance decision advance directive advertisements advertising affirmative action Afghanistan age assessment agency age of criminal responsibility aggravated damages agreement Agriculture Ahava Ahmad Faraz Khan AI air noise air pollution air quality air travel Al-Saadoon and Mufdhi Alan Turing ALBA alcohol dependence algorithm algorithms Alien Tort Statute alignment problem Al Jedda allergy allocation of resources Al Qaeda Al Quaeda Al Rawi Al Skeini alternative medicine alternative therapy altruism American Declaration of Independence Amnesty International Amnesty International 2010 Report amphibians amusement parks ancillary relief Andy Coulson animal cruelty animal culls animal rights Animals animal welfare anonymising anonymity anonymous website anorexia nervosa an rights Ansari ANS v ML [2012] UKSC 30 anti-blasphemy laws anti-discriminatiom anti-semitism anti-terrorism review anti-terrorist legislation antibody antiretrovirals anxious scrutiny AONB A P Herbert appeal Appeals archeology Arctic charr Arhuus Convention Armed forces army arrest Article 1 Protocol 1 Article 2 article 3 article 3 UNCRC article 5 Article 5 ECHR article 5(3) Article 6 article 6 criminal Article 6(3) Article 8 Article 8 claim against council Article 8 protection of privacy Article 9 article 10 Article 11 article 13 Article 14 Article 50 article 263 TFEU artificial hydration and nutrition Artificial Intelligence artificial nutrition and hydration Artile 8 asbestosis Assange Assange extradition assisted reproduction assisted suicide assisting suicide associated newspapers asylum asylum amnesty asylum claim asylum law asylum seeker asylum seeker death driver asylum seekers ATE premiums atheism Atul Gawande audio Australia australian constitution autism autonomy axel springer axel springer ag ayslum Azelle Rodney babar ahmad baby Baby P badger cull badgers Badger Trust bad judges bad tackle Baha Mousa Public Inquiry Bahta & Ors bail BAILII bailout Balen Report ban bankers bonuses Bank Mellat baptism barclay brothers barristers bats' rights battlefield BBC beaches bedroom tax beijing belief benefit cap benefits bereavement damages best interests big business bike training service bilateral trade treaty bill of right Bill of Rights Bill of rights commission Bingham Rule of Law Centre Binyam Mohamed bioethics biology biomedicine biometric data biotechnology bipolar disorder birds directive birmingham birth certificate births deaths and marriages BJ (INCAPACITATED ADULT) sub nom SALFORD CITY COUNCIL v BJ Black & Morgan v. Wilkinson blawg blawg review blight blogging blogosphere blogs blood Bloody Sunday Bloody Sunday findings BNP boaters boats Body scanners Boris Johnson bovine TB bradley manning BRCA BRCA gene BRCA mutation breach of Article 6 breach of Article 6(1) breach of confidence breast cancer brevet brexit Brian Haw bribery Bribery Act 2010 Brighton Conference Brighton Declaration British Airways British Airways v Unite British Bill of Rights British Chiropractic Association British citizenship British constitution British embassy british lawyers British soldiers Broadmoor bronze soldier brownlie browsing BSkyB BUCKLAND v. THE UNITED KINGDOM - 40060/08 - HEJUD Buddhism budget Bull v Hall burkha Burnham Market Book Festival Cadder Cafcass Canada canal cancellation cancer CAP capacity carbon capture cardio-pulmonary resuscitation Care and Support Bill care home care home; elderly people; dementia; capacity; deprivation of liberty care homes care order Care orders care proceedings car insurance carnivores Carson v UK case law Case Note Catholic Care Catholic Church catholic midwives CBI CCTV cerebral palsy CETA CFAs chagos Chagos Islanders charitable objects charity Charity Commission Charles J read judgment Simon Lewis Charlie Hebdo charter Charter of Fundamental Rights chemotherapy chief coroner child child's best interests child abduction child poverty Child Poverty Action Group child protection Children children's homes children's rights Children Act children giving evidence child welfare chimpanzees China Chindamo Chris Grayling Chris Packham Christian christianity church church of scientology CIA circumcision citizens advice bureau citizenship citizens rights civil liberties civil liberties campaigners civil partnerships civil proceedings civl partnerships CJEU CJEU rule of law class of degree client earth climate change climate change sceptic climategate climate research unit clinical need clinical negligence cloning closed material procedure Closed Material Procedures Coalition agreement Coalition Government Code Civile code of conduct Coercive and controlling behaviour cohabitees cold calling Cologne combat immunity comments comment thread commission Commission for Equality & Human Rights Commission on a Bill of Rights common buzzard common law common law rights communications Communications Act 2003 communications data Communications Data Bill 2008 Compassion in World Farming compelementary medicine compensation competition complementary medicine compulsory detention compulsory labour computer hacking computer science concentration camps conditional fee agreements conditions Confederation of British Industry confidentiality confiscation order conscience conscience clause conscientious objection consent conservation Conservative Party Conservatives constitution constitutional court of south africa constitutional disorder construction consultation consultation responses contact order contact point contempt of court contempt of court act content neutrality content providers contingency fee arrangements contract control and restraint Control orders Convention system of protection Conway cookies copying Copyright copyright infringement cornrows coronavirus coroner Coroner's inquest coroners Coroners and Justice Act 2009 corporal punishment cosmetics testing costs Costs and Procedure costs budgets council Council of Europe Counter Terrorism and Security Bill cour de cassation court Court of Justice of the European Union Court of Protection Court of Session Court Orders court procedure Courts Bill Courts Martial Covent Garden Coventry Council CPR gateway CPS CRB challenge credibiility] credibility cricket crime crimes against humanity Criminal criminal conviction Criminal Courts Charge criminal justice Criminal Justice and Courts Bill criminal law Criminal Legal Aid criminal prosecution criminal records criminal responsibility criminal sentencing Cross Examination Crown Prosecution Service crr crucifix cryonic preservation custody custody dispute cuts Cybersecurity D daily mail Daily Mirror Dajid Singh Shergill Dale Farm evictions damage Damages dangerous nonsense database data controller data processing data protection data retention data sharing data snooping date rape david cameron David Chaytor David James David Kelly David Miranda day care closures death death match death penalty Debbie Purdy declaration declaration of incompatibility defamation Defamation Act Defamation Bill defaming the dead defence of illegality defendant's costs order deficit defmation DEFRA delegated legislation democracy Democracy village demolition order demotion Dennis Gill dentist's registration fees Department of Health deportation deportation cases deprivation of liberty deprivation of property derogations Detainee inquiry Detention determinism devolution devolved government Dewani diagnosis Diane Pretty Dica diego garcia Digital Economy Act 2010 Digital Economy Bill Dignitas dignity Dignity in Dying diplomacy diplomatic immunity direct action Directive direct marketing director of public prosecutions disability Disability-related harassment disabled claimants disciplinary hearing disclosure Disclosure of Previous Convictions discretionary leave to remain discretion to quash Discrimination Discrimination law disease dismissal disqualification dissenting judges Divisional Court divorce DNA DNA database DNA home-testing DNA retention DNA testing doctor doctor-patient relationship doctors doctrine of double effect doctrine of state act does it matter? domestic violence domestic workers Dominic Grieve don't ask don't ask don't tell don't tell donor Do Not Resuscitate Notices Doogan and Wood do trees have rights? double conviction DPP guidelines Dr Chhabra dripa driving licence driving penalty Drones Drone strikes drug dealer damages drug offence Dr Zakir Naik Dublin Convention Dublin II Dublin III regulation Dublin II Regulation Dublin Regulation Dudko duties duty of care duty to investigate duty to rescue eastenders eating horses ECHR economic and social rights economic loss economic rights ECtHR Ed Snowden Education Edward Snowden EHRC elderly election election court election results Electoral Commission report Electoral law electric cars electricity Elizabeth Warren ellie butler el masri embryo embryonic stem cells embryos emergency budget emissions trading employers Employment employment appeal tribunal employment disputes employment law employment rights Employment Tribunal fees employment tribunals employment vetting English Defence Leauge English translation enhanced criminal record checks entitlement Environment environmental challenges environmental impact assessment environmental information environmental justice Environmental law environmental law foundation environmental liability directive environmental protection environmental rights environment brexit Envrionmental Information Directive epa endangerment finding eployment Equality Act Equality Act 2010 Equality and Human Rights Commission Equality and Human Rights Commission v Prime Minister & Ors [2011] EWHC 2401 (Admin) - equality of arms equal marriage equal marriage consultation equal treatment erika espionage ethics EU eu and strasbourg EU Charter EU Charter of Fundamental Rights EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms eu commission EU competence eu costs eu courts EU criminal Law opt out eu documents eu law Europe european european arrest warrant European Charter European Charter of Fundamental Rights European Charter of Fundamental Rigths European Commission European Communities Act European Convention European Convention on Human Rights European Court European Court of European Court of Human Rights European Court of Human Rights reform European Court of Justice european disability forum European law European Sanctions Blog European Social Charter european union Eurozone EUSFTA eu state liability euthanasia EU transparency EU Turkey summit EU waste directive eviction evidence evidence-based medicine Evidence-based policy evidence of torture evironmental assessment evolution ex-pats exceptional case funding exceptionality excessive taxes exclusion exclusion order executions exhaustion of domestic remedies expenses expenses scandal expert evidence Expert evidence on foreign law Express extinct extinction rebellion extra-jurisdictional reach of ECHR extra-territoriality extradition extradition act extradition procedures extradition review extraordinary rendition Eyjafjallajökull volcano Facebook Facebook contempt facial recognition factitious disorder factory farming fair procedures Fair Trial faith courts fake news false imprisonment false passport Families Need Fathers Family Family Court family courts Family Courts without a Lawyer: A Handbook for Litigants in Person family division Family Justice Review family law family legal aid Family life farage farm farm animals farming fast-track removal fatal accidents act fathers fathers rights feature fertility treatment FGM finance Financial Conduct Authority financial dependency financial harm financial information Financial Services Authority Firat Dink First Amendment first publishers fisheries fishing claims fishing industry fishing quota fishing rights fitness to practise Flood v The Times Flood v Times foetus foia food banks forced marriage force feeding foreign criminals foreign office foreign policy forensic science format shifting Fourteenth Amendment fracking France francovich freedom freedom of assembly Freedom of Association freedom of conscience Freedom of Expression freedom of information Freedom of Information Act 2000 freedom of movement freedom of speech freedom of the press free expression Freemen of the land free movement of goods free speech free will freezing assets French schools FTP fundamental rights Funeral pyre Future of legal blogging G (Children) G4S G20 protest Gabrielle Giffords Gaddafi regime gainsborough game birds Gamu Nhengu gangbo gang injunctions Garry Mann gary dobson Gary McFarlane gay couple gay discrimination Gay marriage gay rights gay soldiers Gaza Gaza conflict gazza GCHQ gdpr GE 2017 gearbox Gender gender reassignment General Dental Council General Duty General Election general election 2010 general election 2019 General Medical Council genes genetic affinity genetic discrimination genetic disorder genetic engineering genetic information Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act genetic modification genetics genetic testing Geneva Convention genome genome sequencing Geoff Hoon George Osborne German Chancellor German court Germany germ line mutation Ghailani GlaxoSmithKlein gmc Goldman Sachs golf course Google government governmental bodies GP privacy grayling consultation Great Repeal Bill green belt grenfell Gresham College grooming gross offence Guantanamo Bay Guardian News and Media Ltd guernsey G v E & Ors G v E & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 939 gwyneth paltrow gypsies H1N1 habeas corpus habitats Habitats Directive habitats protection hackgate Halsbury's Law Exchange hammerton v uk hancock Haney happy new year harassment Hardeep Singh Haringey Council haringey council tax benefit Harkins and Edwards hate speech Health healthcare health insurance hearing loss Heathrow heist heightened scrutiny Henry VII Henry VIII herd immunity hereditary disorder High Court of Justiciary high speed train route Hindu Hirst No. 2 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 home homelessness Home Office Home Office v Tariq homeopathy Homo Deus homophobia homo sapiens homosexual hooding horisontality horizontal application horizontal effect horsemeat hospitals Hounslow v Powell House of Commons Housing housing benefit housing benefits Howard Donald Howard League for Penal Reform how judges decide cases hra damages claim HRA incorporation Hrant Dink HRLA HS2 hs2 challenge hts http://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2011/04/11/us-state-department-reports-on-uk-human-rights/ human being human dignity Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority human genome humanism 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 in private disputes human rights news human rights record Human Rights Watch human right to education Human Tissue Act human trafficking hung parliament hunting Huntington's Chorea Huntington's Disease HXA hyper injunctions Ian McEwan ICAO Igor Sutyagin illegal immigration illegality illegality defence illegitimacy image rights imaginary litigation immigration Immigration/Extradition Immigration Act 2014 immigration appeals immigration detention immigration judge immigration rules immunity Imports incorporation HRA increase of sanction indefinite leave to remain indian advocates indian supreme court indirect discrimination Indonesia Industrial Action informed consent Infrastructure Planning Committee inherent jurisdiction inherited disease Inhuman and degrading treatment injunction injunction continued inland revenue Inquest inquest law Inquests inquiry insanity inshore fleet insult insurance insurmountable obstacles intellectual property intelligence intelligence services act intensive care intercept evidence interception interests of the child interim remedies international international comity international conflict international court of justice international criminal court international humanitarian law international human rights international human rights law International Labour Organisation international law International Stem Cell Corporation international treaty obligations internet internet libel internet service providers internment internship interrogation intrusion inuit invasive species invention investigation investigative duty in vitro fertilisation Iran iranian bank sanctions Iranian nuclear program iran sanctions Iraq Iraqi asylum seeker Iraq War Ireland Irish Constitution irrationality ISC ISIL islam isolated nucleic acids isolation Israel israeli palestinian conflict italian ships Italy iTunes IVF ivory ban Jack Dorsey jackson reforms Janowiec and Others v Russia ( Japan japanese knotweed Jason Smith jean charles de menezes Jeet Singh Jefferies jehovah's witnesses Jeremy Clarkson Jeremy Corbyn jeremy hunt jihad Jihadi brides jihadists JIH identity jim duffy job jobseekers' allowance Jogee John Hemming John Terry joint enterprise joint tenancy jonathan sumption Jon Guant Joseph v Spiller journalism judaism judges Judges and Juries judging judgment judgment in default Judicial activism judicial brevity judicial deference Judicial immunity judicial no-mans land judicial oversight judicial power judicial review Judicial Review reform Judicial Studies Board judiciary Julian Assange Julian Asssange Juncker jurisdiction jury trial JUSTICE Justice and Security Act Justice and Security Bill Justice and Security Green Paper Justice Cameron Justice Human Rights Awards JUSTICE Human Rights Awards 2010 justiciability justification just satisfaction Kant Katyn Massacre Kay v Lambeth Kay v UK kazakstan Ken Clarke Ken Pease Kerry McCarthy Kettling Khan v Advocate General for Scotland khordokovsky Kings College Kiobel Klimas koran burning laboratory animals laboratory test Labour labour law lack of reasons Lady Hale land landfill gas landowner landowners language lansley NHS reforms LASPO Law Commission Law Pod UK Law Society Law Society of Scotland leave to enter leave to remain Lee Rigby legal advice privilege legal aid legal aid cuts Legal Aid desert Legal Aid Reforms legal blogs Legal Certainty legality legal naughty step Legal Ombudsman legal privilege legal profession legal professional privilege legal representation legitimate expectation let as a dwelling Leveson Inquiry Levi Bellfield lewisham hospital closure Lewis Malcolm Calver liability Libel libel reform Liberal Democrat Conference Liberal Democrats liberal humanism Liberty libraries closure library closures licence conditions licence to shoot licensee life insurance life orders life sentence life support limestone pavements limitation lisbon treaty Lithuania litigant in person litvinenko live exports livestock livestock trade living instrument living will LME local authorities local government locked in syndrome locus standi london borough of merton London Legal Walk London Probation Trust Lord Bingham Lord Bingham of Cornhill Lord Blair Lord Carey Lord Goldsmith lord irvine Lord Judge Lord Judge speech Lord Justice Jackson Lord Kerr Lord Lester Lord Mance Lord Neuberger Lord Phillips Lord Rodger Lord Sales Lord Saville Report Lord Sumption Lord Taylor LSC tender luftur rahman machine learning MAGA Magna Carta Magna Carter Mail Online mail on sunday Majority Verdict Malcolm Kennedy male circumcision malice malicious falsehood mandela M and Others v Her Majesty’s Treasury manifestation of belief manifestos Margaret Thatcher Margin of Appreciation margin of discretion Maria Gallastegui Marie Colvin marine conservation marine environmental law marine sanctuaries Mark Kennedy mark twain marriage marriage act 1949 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 Mcfarlane McKenzie friend me/cfs research Media and Censorship media judge Medical medical confidentiality medical ethics medical evidence medical liability medical negligence medical profession medical qualifications medical records medical treatment medicine mental capacity mental capacity; press; reporting restrictions Mental Capacity Act Mental Capacity Act 2005 Mental Health mental health act mental health advocacy mental health awareness Mental Health Courts mental health hospital Mental illness merits review mesothelioma metgate MGN v UK michael gove Middle Temple Midwives Milly Dowler minimally conscious minimum income minimum sentence Ministerial Code Ministry of Justice Ministry of Justice cuts miscarriage of justice misfeasance in public office missiles misuse of private information mitochondrial disease MMR MMR vaccination modern slavery Mohamed monitoring powers monsanto montgomery mooring moral circle morality morocco mortgage fraud mortuaries motherhood motor neuron disease Motor Neurone disease Moulton Mousa movement for democratic change MP expenses Mr Brewer Mr Gul Mr Justice Eady Mr Justice Sharp MS (Palestinian Territories) (FC) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Munchausen Munchausen by proxy murder murder reform music Musician's Union Muslim mustafa kamal mutation mutations myanmar MY Cannis my kingdom for a horse Myriad NADA v. SWITZERLAND - 10593/08 - HEJUD [2012] ECHR 1691 Nadja Benaissa naked rambler Naomi Campbell narcolepsy National Health Act nationality National Origin National Pro Bono Week national security national sovereignty Natural England natural rights nature nature conservation naturism Nazi neanderthals necessary implication need for legal aid needs assessment negligence neighbour dispute Neuberger neural degeneration neurogenerative disease neuroscience Newcastle university news News of the World news roundup new Supreme Court President NGO standing NHS NHS Risk Register NICE Nick Clegg Nicklinson Niqaab niqab No Angels Noise Regulations 2005 non-justiciability nonhuman animals non voluntary euthanasia Northern Ireland Northern Irish Assembly notification requirements nuclear challenges nuisance nurse nursing nursing home obiter dicta Occupy London offensive jokes Offensive Speech offensive t shirt official solicitor of Rights Commission oil and gas oil spill olympics open justice oppress oppressive treatment OPQ v BJM orchestra orthodox schools Osama Bin Laden Osborn v The Parole Board [2013] UKSC 61 ouster clause overseas aid Oxford University Palestinian Territories palliative care palliative sedation paramount consideration paramountcy principle parental responsibility order parental rights parenthood parents responsibility parking spaces parliament parliamentary expenses parliamentary expenses scandal Parliamentary sovereignty Parliament square parole parole board party funding passengers rights passing off passive smoking passport passport seizure pastor Terry Jones patent patents paternity Pathway Students patiets' rights Patrick Quinn murder Paul Chambers PCOs peace-keeping operations Pensions people for the ethical treatment of animals (Peta) performers' rights permanent injunction persecution persistent vegetative state personal data personal information Personal Injury personality rights Personal life perversity Pet Animals Act 1951 Peter and Hazelmary Bull Peter Gibson pet shops PF and EF v UK Philip Lawrence Phil Woolas phone hacking phone taps photos photovoltaics physical and mental disabilities physical restraint physician assisted death Pinnock Piracy PJS placement order planning planning human rights planning system planning time limits plantagenet plebgate pleural plaques POCA podcast points poison Poland Police police investigations police liability police misconduct police powers police surveillance policing Policy Exchange report political advertising political judges political persecution politicians for hire Politics Politics/Public Order pollution polonium poor reporting Pope Pope's visit Pope Benedict porsche 917 portal possession order possession proceedings post mortem Posts power of attorney PoW letters to ministers pre-nup pre-nuptial Pre-trial detention predator control pregnancy preliminary reference prerogative powers press Press Association press briefing press freedom Priest priests primary legislation Prince Andrew 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 prison rules Prisons prison vote privacy privacy injunction privacy law through the front door private disputes Private life private nuisance private use procedural unfairness Procedure proceeds of crime Professional Discipline professional indemnity Professional life Property property rights proportionality prosecution Protection of Freedoms Act Protection of Freedoms Bill protective costs Protest protest camp protest rights Protocol 15 psychiatric hospitals psychology psychotherapy Public/Private public access publication public authorities public authority public bodies Public Bodies Bill public figure public funding public inquiries public inquiry public interest public interest environmental litigation public interest immunity public interest litigation publicity public law unfairness Public Order public powers public procurement Public Sector Equality Duty Public Services Ombudsman Putin putting the past behind quango quantum quarantine Queen's Speech queer in the 21st century R (on the application of) v Joint Committee of Primary Care Trusts & Anor [2012] EWCA Civ 472 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 Rabone and another v Pennine Care NHS Foundation Trust [2012] UKSC 2 Race race relations Rachel Corrie racial discrimination Racial equality radio radiotherapy Radmacher Raed Salah Mahajna Raed Saleh Ramsgate randomised controlled trial rape rape case raptors Ratcliffe 6 Ratcliffe on Soar Ratcliffe power station rating rationality rcs RCW v A Local Authority reasonableness reasons reasons challenges recent case law and news Recent posts reception conditions recognition of judgments recreational rights Redfearn v UK referendum reform refugee applications refugee crisis refugee status refusal of treatment Registrar of Births Deaths and Marriages registration regulatory rehabilitation of offenders Reith Lectures Re J (A Child: Disclosure) [2012] EWCA Civ 1204 relgious freedom Religion religion in the courts religious beliefs religious discrimination religious freedom religious prosecution remedies renewables subsidies rent repeal reporting restrictions representation reproductive rights reproductive technologies reproductive wrongs rescue rescuer's claim resettlement of offenders resource allocation respect for family life responsibility in tort restrictions on exports restrictions on liberty results 2010 resuscitation retrospective application of the Human Rights Act retrospective legislation retrospective penalty retrospectivity rev paul nicholson reynolds Reynolds defence Re [2012] EWCA Civ 1233 richard III Richard O'Dwyer right of appeal rightsifno RightsInfo rights of children Right to a fair hearing right to a fair trial right to a home right to a remedy right to artistic expression right to a student loan right to autonomy right to autonomy and privacy right to die right to dies right to die with dignity right to dignity right to education right to expression right to family life right to food right to free enjoyment of possessions right to information right to liberty right to life right to peaceful enjoyment of property Right to Privacy right to private and family life right to refuse treatment right to respect for private life right to silence right to strike right to swim right to truth right to vote Rihanna Rio Ferdinand riots ripa rise of fascism risk risk assessment rival supermarkets Roma Roman Catholic Roman Catholic Church roman catholic schools Romania Rooney's Gold roundup roundup ready Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Foundation Trust royal dutch petroleum royal name Royal Oper House Royal Prerogative rule of law Rupert Jackson Rusal Russia russia and human rights Russian Federal Security Service Rutherford Ryanair s sadie frost Safari same-sex same sex parents same sex partnerships same sex relationship sanctions set aside sanctity of life Sandiford Sapiens Sarah Ferguson sark satire saudi arabia Savage (Respondent) v South Essex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust Saville Report schedule 7 schizophrenia school building school surveillance schrems science scientific atheism scientific research scientology Scoppola Scotland Scotland Act Scotland Act 1998 Scotland Bill Scottish Government Scottish Human Rights Commission scottish landlord and tenant Scottish Parliament SCOTUS sea fishing seals Seal v UK search engines search powers secondary legislation secondary smoking secrecy Secretary of State Secretary of State for the Home Department v AP secret courts secret criminal trial secret evidence secret justice Secret trials sectarianism secularism security security cameras security services security vetting Sedar Mohammed segregation Select Committee on AI self-defence self-incrimination seminar sentencing September 11 serco serious harm sermon Seroxat service outside jurisdiction set-off Sewel Convention sex abuse sex ban sex ban low IQ sex offender Sex offenders sex register sexual abuse Sexual Offences sexual orientation sexual orientation regulations SFO investigation sfo unlawfulness shaker aamer Shamima Begum sham marriage shared residence order Sharon Shoesmith shetland shipping shipwreck Shirley Chaplin shooting shoulder shrug should trees have rights SIAC sihkism Simon Singh sir alan ward Sir Nicholas Wall Sir Peter six months rule slander slaughterhouses slavery smacking small claims court small solar Smith Smith & Ors v The Ministry of Defence [2012] EWCA Civ 1365 smog smoking ban Snyder v Phelps social and economic rights social benefits social housing socialite social media social security law social welfare social workers Solicitorsfromhell website solitary confinement soma somali pirates sources South Africa south african constitution sovereignty Sovereignty clause soviet union soybean Spanish properties spare room subsidy special advocate special advocates species specific performance spending cuts spielmann squatters Standing standing rules starvation state immunity statelessness statute statutory power Statutory purpose stay of execution stem cell research stem cells stem cell therapy Stephen Gough stephen sedley stepping hill hospital Sterilisation steve macqueen Steven Neary stobart-law stop and search stop powers Stormont Assembly storms Strasborug Strasbourg Strasbourg Court strasbourg damages pirates strasbourg law Strasbourg terminology strategic environmental assessment strike strike out Strikes student loans sturgeon subsidies Sugar v BBC suicide suicide act 1961 super injunction super injunctions supermax prisons superstition Supreme Court Supreme Court Live Supreme Court of Canada Supreme Court Scotland surgery surrogacy surrogacy arrangement surveillance swine flu Syria systemic violence Take That tallinn tariff Taser Tax tax avoidance tax discrimination tchenguiz technology Telegraph telephone preference service television justice tenancy tent city termination termination of pregnancy terror asset freezing Terrorism terrorism act terrorism act 2000 terrorism legislation terrorism prosecution terrorist finance terrorist threat terry pratchett Tesla testamentary dispositions The Bike Project the Catholic church The Corner House theism The Law in These Parts therapy Theresa May the right to privacy The Stig The Sun third countries third party appeals three way case time limits time limits in human rights Tobacco tobacco cartels Top Gear tort Torture torture inquiry totally without merit TPIM TPP tracking trade trade secrets trades unions trade union congress Trade Unions transexual transsexual transsexuals travel travellers travel restrictions treason treatment treaty treaty accession trial by jury trolling TTIP TTM v London Borough of Hackney & Ors Tugendhat tumour Turkey tweeting in court Twitter twitter in court Twitter Joke Trial UK UK citizenship uk constitution UK election UK Human Rights Blog UK Human Rights Roundup UKIP UK Jewish Film Festival ukraine UK Supreme Court UK Uncut ultra orthodox jews ultra vires UN unable to vote unacceptable behaviour policy unaccompanied minors unborn child UN Convention on the Rights of the Child unelected judges unemployment unfair consultation unfair dismissal unfairness at hearing Unison Unite United Against Fascism Group United Kingdom United Nations United States United States v Windsor universal declaration of human rights universal jurisdiction Universal Periodic Review University University Fees university of east anglia University of Southampton unjust and oppressive unlawful arrest unlawful detention unpaid work schemes UN Resolution unsolicited calls UPR US aviation US Constitution use as of right US Supreme Court vaccination Valkyries variants veganism vehicle breakdown vetting and barring vicarious liability victim victim status Victoria Climbie victorian charter Vienna airport vigilantism villagisation vinton cerf violence violist visa scheme vivisection voluntary euthanasia Volunteers voter compensation voters compensation voting voting compensation vulnerable Wagner Wakefield Wales War war correspondents ward of court War Horse water utilities Watts Wayne Rooney Websites welfare of child welfare of children welfare of the child welfare state welsh bill western sahara whaling What would happen if the UK withdrew from the European Court of Human Rights whimbrel whisky Whistleblowing WHO who is JIH whole gene sequencing whole life orders whorship Wikileaked cable Wikileaks wiklleaks Wild Law wildlife Wildlife and Countryside Act will William Hague William Marbury wills wind farms wind turbine Winterbourne View witchcraft withdrawal of treatment wolves women's rights Woolas worboys Workers working time directive wrongful birth wrongful conception wrongful life WTO wuhan X AND OTHERS v. AUSTRIA - 19010/07 - HEJUD [2013] ECHR 148 X Factor XX v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2012] EWCA Civ 742 X Y and Z v UK Yemshaw Yildirim v Turkey Your freedom website YouTube yukos Yuval Noah Hariri Zakir Naik Zanu-PF Zero Hours Contracts ZH (Tanzania) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Zimbabwe Zimbabwe farm invasions ZN (Afghanistan) (FC) and others ZZ [2015] CSIH 29 [2015] CSOH 168 £750

Disclaimer


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: