ECHR


Notice: Undefined variable: output in /www/sites/www.jimmeyer.co.uk/wp-content/thesis/boxes/robobrief-case-precedents-box/box.php on line 291

The claimant’s action against the Ministry of the Interior for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia for damages for alleged torture and unlawful imprisonment in Saudi Arabia was struck out on the grounds of state immunity under the State Immunity Act 1978.

[2004] EWCA Civ 1123

[2004] EWCA Civ 1123
CA (Civ Div) (Pill LJ, Laws LJ, Neuberger LJ)
8 November 2004

It would be contrary to the exercise of the statutory power and unrealistic to expect the home secretary to investigate each statement relied on to issue a certificate under the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 s.21 with a view to deciding whether circumstances in which the statement was obtained involved torture, thereby breaching European Convention on Human Rights 1950 Art.3.

[2004] EWCA Civ 1031

[2004] EWCA Civ 1031
CA (Civ Div) (Tuckey LJ, Clarke LJ, Jackson J)
1 January 1970

Where evidence before a parole board came from a source who would be at risk were his identity to be disclosed to the prisoner, the board had an inherent power to devise procedures to protect that source, including a direction that his evidence should be withheld from the prisoner or from his legal representatives. The board also had the power, through the specially appointed advocate procedure, to mitigate any unfairness to the prisoner caused by the withholding of such evidence.

[2004] UKHL 39

[2004] UKHL 39
HL (Lord Steyn, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Baroness Hale of Richmond, Lord Carswell, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood)
1 January 1970

A blanket policy of retention and use by the police of DNA samples and fingerprint evidence after a suspect had been cleared of the offence that gave rise to the collection of such evidence was compatible with the Human Rights Act 1998 Sch.1 Part I Art.8 and Art.14.

[2004] EWCA Civ 943

[2004] EWCA Civ 943
CA (Civ Div) (Auld LJ, Neuberger LJ, Holman J)
1 January 1970

The rule of absolute immunity from suit applied to complaints made to an employment tribunal about unlawful discriminatory conduct in the course of an internal police disciplinary hearing.

[2004] EWHC 1417 (Admin)

[2004] EWHC 1417 (Admin)
DC (Newman J, Toulson J)
1 January 1970

The claimant’s application for permission to apply for judicial review had been premature as its proposed challenge to the Environment Agency’s decision, to prosecute the claimants for alleged breaches concerning its waste management, had to be determined after investigation of the facts and in the context of the evidence. It would not be appropriate to attempt, by judicial review, on incomplete facts, to intervene in the progress of the prosecution.

[2004] EWCA Crim 1393

[2004] EWCA Crim 1393
CA (Crim Div) (Scott Baker LJ, Hunt J, Judge Radford)
6 November 2004

The appellant had failed to follow the correct procedure in seeking to cross-examine the complainant in a prosecution for rape either on the ground of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 s.41(3) and (5) or as a result of falling outside the restriction imposed by s.41 of the Act in relation to questioning about a complainant’s sexual history.

[2004] EWCA Civ 514

[2004] EWCA Civ 514
CA (Civ Div) (Lord Woolf of Barnes LCJ, Rix LJ, Carnwath LJ)
1 January 1970

Where there was a reasonable justification for the difference in treatment in relation to parole of the appellant, who was serving a sentence of over 15 years, and his chosen comparators, who were serving sentences of less than 15 years, there could be no contravention of European Convention on Human Rights Art.5 when read with Art.14.

[2004] EWHC 715 (Admin)

[2004] EWHC 715 (Admin)
DC (Eady J, Laws LJ)
1 January 1970

There was no inherent jurisdiction or power under the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 enabling a court to make a special measures direction allowing a defendant who was a child to give evidence by live video link, where she was too scared testify in the physical presence of her co-defendants.

[2004] EWCA Crim 621

[2004] EWCA Crim 621
CMAC (Rose LJ, Brown J, Newman J)
1 January 1970

The appellant’s conviction following a Naval Court Martial was unsafe as the judge advocate was a serving naval officer and not a civilian.

Scroll to top