By: Guest Contributor

First post-election human rights conference

20 April 2010 by Guest Contributor

The conference logo

We have been asking what the future of the Human Rights Act will be following the General Election 2010, and whether there will soon be a Bill of Rights.

The University of Salford have informed us that they will be hosting the first post-election Human Rights conference, which aims to address these issues. The Conference also coincides Human Rights Act 1998’s tenth birthday.

The Conference is ‘Ten years on’: A Multi-perspective Evaluation of the Human Rights Act – Salford Human Rights Conference 2010″, at the University of Salford on Friday and Saturday 4-5 June 2010. Full details can be found here and a list of speakers here.

Recent news posts

18 April 2010 by Guest Contributor

Recent news posts which you may have missed:

• What was the Lord Chief Justice really saying about the European Court?
• Singh libel case dropped in light of robust Court of Appeal judgment
• Will the Human Rights Act survive the May 6th election?
• Legal aid is a human right, even for politicians
• New head of Family Court says social workers perceived as “arrogant and enthusiastic removers of children”

You can also read our archive of news posts here

Recent case law posts

17 April 2010 by Guest Contributor

Recent case law posts which you may have missed:

• Refusal to grant legal aid to mother for inquest into son’s death was unlawful
• Is the historic right to trial by jury slipping away?
• High Court defends freedom of expression for news websites
• NHS Nurse banned from wearing crucifix at work loses discrimination claim
• Removal of child following faulty diagnosis of injury breached Article 8

You can also read our archive of case law posts here

Chairman of Baha Mousa Public Inquiry will not force the MoD to disclose Attorney General human rights advice

6 April 2010 by Guest Contributor

Lord Goldsmith

Sir William Gage, the Chairman of the Baha Mousa Public Inquiry, has refused an application by participants in the Inquiry to compel the Ministry of Defence (MoD) to disclose advice produced by the former Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith.

The MoD claimed legal professional privilege in respect of the Attorney-General’s Advice of 2003 on the application of the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) to the British Army’s operations in Iraq during the Iraq war.

The Inquiry, which has been ongoing since July 2009, aims to investigate and report on the circumstances surrounding the death of Baha Mousa by the British Army and the treatment of those detained with him, in particular where responsibility lay for approving the practice of conditioning detainees by any members of the 1st Battalion, The Queen’s Lancashire Regiment in Iraq in 2003.

Read more:

• You can read the Chairman’s full Ruling here.
• Read coverage in The Times

Recent case comments

5 April 2010 by Guest Contributor

Our most recent in-depth human rights case comments:

• Removal of child following faulty diagnosis of injury breached Article 8 ((AD and OD v United Kingdom (Application No 28680/06))
• Exceptionally serious circumstances must be established to resist extradition order says Supreme Court (Norris v United States )
• EU Directive on Refugee status does not enhance asylum rights under Strasbourg Convention (The Queen on the Application of MK(Iran) v Secretary of State for the Home Department)
• Supreme Court refers question of public interest in disclosure about mobile phone masts to ECJ (Office of Communications v Information Commissioner)
• Teacher subject to disciplinary proceedings entitled to legal representation if his name is to be added to children protection register (Governors of X School v R(on the Application of G) (Claimant) & Y City Council and Secretary of State for Children and Schools and Families (Interveners) & Equality and Human Rights Commission (Interested Party))
• Jewish Free School policy on admissions in breach of race relations law (R (on the application of E) (Respondent) v (1) JFS Governing Body (2) Admissions Panel of JFS (Appellants) : R (on the application of E) (Respondent) v (1) JFS Governing Body (2) Admissions Panel of JFS (Appellants) & ORS (United Synagogue))

Recent posts roundup

29 March 2010 by Guest Contributor

• European Court rejects UK pensioners’ top-up claim
• Joint Committee on Human Rights calls for control order scheme to be discontinued
• Sharper teeth for the European Court of Human Rights?
• European Commission warns the UK about unfair cost of challenging environmental decisions
• Not unlawful for a Roman Catholic adoption agency to reject same-sex couples
• Are civil partnerships compatible with human rights law?
• Does the Human Rights Act apply to the Battlefield?

Recent case summaries

20 March 2010 by Guest Contributor

• Not unlawful for a Roman Catholic adoption agency to reject same-sex couples (19 March 2010)
• Education not recognised as a “civil right” under Convention due process rules (12 March 2010)
• Exceptionally serious circumstances must be established to resist extradition order says Supreme Court (5 March 2010)
• EU Directive on Refugee status does not enhance asylum rights under Strasbourg Convention (28 February 2010)
• Mutual confidentiality between intelligence services trumped by open justice requirements (25 February 2010)
• Hindu wins right to be cremated on a traditional funeral pyre (11 February 2010)

Recent posts roundup

16 March 2010 by Guest Contributor

Last week on the UK Human Rights Blog:

• Education not recognised as a “civil right” under Convention due process rules
• Have MI5 “inflicted a body blow on their own reputation”?
• Exceptionally serious circumstances must be established to resist extradition order says Supreme Court
• Should children be protected against giving evidence in court?
• Towards a UK Bill of Rights?

Just Satisfaction – But only just?

13 May 2009 by Guest Contributor

The award of damages under the Human Rights Act – Article by Ben Collins

Article 13 ECHR requires national courts to provide an effective remedy for violations of the convention. This article examines the extent to which the UK courts are prepared to conclude that such an effective remedy should include an award of damages. As will be seen, there is a marked reluctance to award damages save in the clearest cases.

Read article