Applicability of the Human Rights Act 1998 to Armed Forces in Iraq
A 9-judge bench of the Supreme Court considered the question of the application of the European Convention on Human Rights to the armed forces serving in Iraq. The background to the question was the death from heatstroke of a Territorial Army soldier. The specific issue around which the litigation was based was the extent of the investigation required by an inquest, and in particular whether it had to meet the enhanced standards that were applicable if Article 2 ECHR applied. This gave rise to 2 ...
|
Sentence Calculation – Eligibility for Release on Home Detention Curfew
The massive increase in the prison population in the last 15 years has been accompanied by efforts to ensure the early release of prisoners whose risk does not require their incarceration. In the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, the Home Detention Curfew scheme was introduced: this allowed the release of prisoners, subject to electronic tagging, before what would otherwise have been their mandatory release date, subject to a risk assessment process: the length of possible HDC release depended on the ...
|
The issue raised in this case was the proper test for refugee status when the claimed basis for persecution was sexual orientation. The facts involved two homosexual men from countries where homosexual conduct is criminal. The Court of Appeal had accepted government arguments that they could conceal their sexual orientation and so did not meet the test for a “well-founded fear of persecution”: the approach of the court was that this was a “reasonably tolerable” situation and so was outside the c ...
|
The claimant challenged decisions of the Professional Conduct Committee (PCC) of the General Medical Council (GMC) that the applicant was guilty of serious professional misconduct and his name be erased from the medical register. The claimant sought judicial review of the decision. The issue was whether the determination of the PCC was rendered unlawful by virtue of apparent bias.However, the application was dismissed. When applying the role of a fair minded and informed observer, 'being neither ...
|
A defamation action brought against a solicitor in respect of comments made by him to the Daily Mail in response to an article made against his client was protected by the defence of qualified privilege as it was made within the scope of his retainer to act in his client’s interest.
|
The Court of Appeal held that the judge had erred in rejecting expert evidence in a claim relating to a road traffic accident. Whilst the judge was not bound to accept the expert’s evidence if he had good reasons for not doing so, that such expert evidence did not accord with his own experience was insufficient ground for rejecting the evidence. The Court of Appeal also held that standard of care to be applied remained that of a reasonably prudent motorist and the court was not entitled to impos ...
|
A Defendant In Breach Of Duty To Take Measurements Of Noise Levels Could Not Assert Noise Levels Not Excessive
The Court of Appeal allowed the appellant seaman’s appeal against the dismissal of his claim against the respondent ship-owner and in which it was alleged that it had negligently exposed him to excessive levels of noise on board its ships without providing ear protectors. The respondent had acted in breach of duty in failing to take measurements of the noise levels in its ships and such failure had put the appellant in difficulty in proving that he had negligently been exposed to excessive level ...
|
The public interest in publishing a full report of the proceedings and judgment which identified the appellant had to give way to the need to protect him from the risk of violence, and did not justify curtailing his right to respect for his private and family life. An anonymity order would therefore be continued.
|
Sugar v BBC & The Information Commissioner (No 2) [2010] EWCA Civ 715The BBC did not have to disclose a report on its reporting of events in the Middle East as at least one of the purposes for which that information was being held was a genuine journalistic purpose. It was incorrect to consider what was the ‘dominant purpose’ for which the information was held.
|
The European Commission had been correct to withhold from a response to a request under the EC treaty’s Access to Documents provisions the names of five attendees at a meeting. Identifying them would have breached their rights to privacy under the Data Protection Regulation, and no legitimate justification for the transfer of such personal data had been provided.
|
| 1 |