An EAW was invalid so far as it related to an offence of drug trafficking as it had failed to specify any conduct capable of amounting to that offence which had occurred within the requesting state. The remainder of the warrant that pertained to an offence of engaging in a criminal conspiracy with the purpose of committing drug trafficking was valid. Appeal allowed in part.
|
The Criminal Justice Act 2003 introduces an indeterminate sentence of Imprisonment for Public Protection for those who commit a specified offence carrying 10 years or more (and a schedule to the Act sets out a large number of offences) and who are judged to present a risk of causing serious harm in the future but do not merit a life sentence. However, in almost all respects the IPP sentence is analogous to a life sentence. This has led to a significant growth in the population of indeterminate s ...
|
Historically, the detention of life sentence prisoners (and also of those sentenced to life detention in psychiatric hospitals) ended when the Home Secretary so decided: the Parole Board was created to provide advice in relation to these matters (and the Mental Health Review Tribunal). Various cases in the European Court of Human Rights led to legislative changes whereby the Board and Tribunal were given powers of release, in order to satisfy the requirements of Article 5(4) of the Convention th ...
|
No general power under s.45(4), Supreme Court Act 1981 to prohibit publication of defendant’s identity to protect children not concerned in proceedings: An order made under s.11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 at the end of criminal proceedings to prohibit the naming of a convicted defendant, whose name had not been withheld by the court during the proceedings, in order to protect his children, could not properly be made under either that section or s.45(4) of the Supreme Court Act 1981.
|
A hospital breached its duty in failing to carry out a sufficiently thorough examination of a patient and by delaying the diagnosis of anterior compartment syndrome and caused disability.
|
The primary objective of the IPP sentence is to protect the public, not to rehabilitate D. Detention of Ds will cease to be justified under Art.5(1)(a) ECHR when the stage is reached that it is no longer necessary for the protection of the public that they should be confined or if so long elapses without a meaningful review of this question that their detention becomes disproportionate or arbitrary.
|
Judge’s decision to impose reporting restrictions to protect D’s (facing a charge of possessing indecent material) children overturned, as open justice in criminal courts is more important in this case than the protection of children.
|
The Parole Board is not sufficiently independent of the executive.
|
Practice and Procedure - Perversity The Respondent was dismissed from her post as a night hostel worker after abusing a resident. She claimed, inter alia, race discrimination and the Tribunal upheld the claim. Held that the decision was not Meek compliant and was perverse.
|
Practice and Procedure - Restricted Reporting Order Freelance journalist sought revocation of a restricted reporting order where Claimant withdrew claim in the course of hearing. The Tribunal found that she had a locus to be heard, that they had jurisdiction to entertain the application notwithstanding the withdrawal of the claim and that it was appropriate to revoke the order. On appeal, the Employment Tribunal quashed the Tribunal’s decision. The journalist had no right to ...
|
| 1 |