EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS 1950 art.8

[2017] EWHC 1892 (Admin)
[2017] EWHC 1892 (Admin)
QBD (Admin) (Garnham J)
11 July 2017

A district judge had not erred in concluding pursuant to the Extradition Act 2003 s.20 that a requested person who had been convicted of offences in his absence had deliberately absented himself from his trial. She had been entitled to conclude, in the circumstances, that the requested person had gone to considerable lengths to avoid the service of proceedings and that his conduct amounted to a manifest lack of diligence.

[2017] EWHC 1650 (QB)
[2017] EWHC 1650 (QB)
QBD (Warby J)
7 July 2017

A mother failed to establish that a police detective had made a slanderous statement about her while investigating her allegations that her child had been sexually abused by a family member. Although the detective had told the child’s social worker that the mother had lied during a conversation with him, the transfer of that statement onto the child’s medical notes was not likely to cause the mother any reputational harm of the serious nature required by the Defamation Act 2013 s.1. In any event, the statement was protected by qualified privilege.

QBD (Admin) (Sir Alan Wilkie)
14 June 2017

In considering whether an offence on a European arrest warrant seeking the return of a requested person to Austria met the requirements of dual criminality the court had to look at the alleged conduct rather than at the term used to name the offence. In the instant case the offence of slander equated to the UK offence of perverting the course of public justice.

DC (Burnett LJ, Blake J)
17 May 2017

In the circumstances, the passage of time since the commission of a robbery offence and the requested person’s medical condition took the consequences of his extradition beyond hardship and into the realms of oppression.

[2017] EWCA Civ 321
[2017] EWCA Civ 321
CA (Civ Div) (Sir Brian Leveson PQBD, Beatson LJ, Thirlwall LJ)
3 May 2017

The revised statutory scheme for the disclosure of convictions, introduced under the Police Act 1997 (Criminal Record Certificates: Relevant Matters) (Amendment) (England and Wales) Order 2013 following a finding that the original scheme violated ECHR art.8, remained deficient and in need of further amendment. The concept of the revised scheme did not necessarily offend art.8, but its operation in individual cases might. The provisions relating to disclosure of serious offences and multiple offences were not “in accordance with the law”.

[2017] EWHC 995 (Admin)
[2017] EWHC 995 (Admin)
QBD (Admin) (Sir Wyn Williams)
3 May 2017

The extradition of a Polish man to his native country so that he could serve a short sentence would amount to a disproportionate interference with his rights and those of his family under ECHR art.8. Significantly, his wife was an alcoholic and separation from her husband was likely to cause a marked deterioration in her condition.

QBD (Admin) (Dove J)
12 April 2017

Although there had been a lengthy unexplained delay in bringing criminal proceedings against an individual for an alleged crime of forgery in 2001, the public interest in honouring the UK’s extradition obligations outweighed his right to family life in the UK, and extradition would not be unjust or oppressive despite the passage of time.

[2017] UKSC 30
[2017] UKSC 30
SC (Lord Mance JSC, Lord Kerr JSC, Lord Reed JSC, Lord Hughes JSC, Lord Toulson JSC)
11 April 2017

A decision to prosecute an offence under the Identity Cards Act 2006 s.25(1), made where the prosecutor had reasonable cause to believe the person concerned to be guilty of the offence charged, did not fall within the scope of ECHR art.8.

[2017] UKSC 25
[2017] UKSC 25
SC (Lord Kerr JSC, Lord Wilson JSC, Lord Reed JSC, Lord Hughes JSC, Lord Hodge JSC)
5 April 2017

The Sexual Offences (Scotland) Act 2009 s.39(2)(a)(i), which prevented a person charged with a sexual offence against an older child from relying, in cases where he had “previously been charged by the police with a relevant sexual offence”, on the defence that he reasonably believed that the child had attained the age of 16, was incompatible with the ECHR art.8 rights of the appellant. It was also likely to give rise to breaches of art.8 in many other cases.

[2017] EWHC 571 (Admin)
[2017] EWHC 571 (Admin)
DC (Beatson LJ, Green J)
22 March 2017

It was arguable that there was a continuing duty on judicial authorities issuing European arrest warrants to review the proportionality of extradition throughout the proceedings.

Scroll to top