Doughty Street - Human Rights Database

HRA Research Project - In collaboration with Doughty Street Human Rights Unit and the LSE Human Rights Centre

DATABASE OF CASES UNDER THE HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998

Claire O'Brien & Janet Arkinstall *

Please note that the Human Rights Act Research Project concluded its work in September 2002. Although correct at the time of writing, some of the information on these webpages (for example the database of cases under HRA 1998) is therefore historical and should not be considered as representing the present state of the law.

Search the HRA Research Project Database

Keyword(s):

Date range (dd/mm/yyyy):

Start: End:

ECHR Articles cited:

Claims upheld:

Claim	Yes	No
S3
S4
S6

Type of case:

Subject matter:

Displaying records 26 - 50 out of 424

Pages: [ Previous < | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | > Next ]

Name Of Case	Date	Court	Judge(s)	Types Of Proceedings	Subject Matter	ECHR Articles cited	Law in issue	Outcome on ECHR/HRA issue

Skrine & Co v Euromoney Publications Plc T.L.R. 10/11/2000	03 November 2000	High Court (Queen's Bench Division)	Morland J	Application to strike out defence to contribution notice	Civil procedure	Article 10, Article 6	Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978	i) In deciding amount of contribution for defamation damages under CL(C)A 1978, court is required to have regard to Art 10 and “chilling effect” on free expression of large damages awarded in another jurisdiction; ii) comity a)requires UK courts not to adjudicate on broad attacks on foreign judiciary or executive and b)may require allowing strike-out of pleadings making such allegations
Re R (A Child) 2000 WL 33148767 (2001) 1 F.L.R. 365 (2001) 1 F.C.R. 238 TLR 13/02/2001	07 November 2000	High Court (Family Division)	Holman J	Preliminary issue in adoption proceedings	Family - adoption	Article 6, Article 8	Children Act 1989 Adoption Act 1976 obligations on guardian ad litem	Guardian ad litem not required by English law or ECHR to contact extended family of child to be freed for adoption even if mother not disclosed child’s existence to relatives. On the facts, court satisfied that child’s best interests call for confidentiality
R v Webb, R v Simpson (Attorney-General's References Nos 87 & 86 of 1999) TLR 08/11/2000 2001 Crim LR 58	08 November 2000	Court of Appeal	Kennedy LJ , Forbes J , Steele J	A-G’s application to refer sentences for review (under s26 CJA 1988)	Crime - sentencing	Article 6	Factors affecting exercise of Court of Appeal’s power to increase sentence	Court of Appeal’s power to increase sentence cannot possibly be regarded as unfair per se under ECHR or otherwise; on the facts neither delay in sentencing nor legitimate expectation could preclude custodial sentences being imposed
R v A Special Commissioner ex parte Morgan Grenfell T.L.R. 22/11/2000	08 November 2000	High Court (Queen's Bench Division)	Buxton LJ , Penry-Davey	Judicial review (substantive hearing)	Taxation - procedure	Article 6, Article 8	s20(1) & (7) Taxes Management Act 1970	Legal professional privilege enjoys wider protection under domestic law than under ECHR; Special Commissioner’s decision under s20(7) TMA 1970 does not in itself determine civil rights or obligations (because preliminary) so Art 6 not engaged unless another ECHR right contingently in play; right to oral hearing under Art 6 flows from right to public hearing so that, where a public hearing is inept, no right to oral hearing ensues
R v Doran, Parsons and Togher LTL 10/11/2000 TLR 21/11/2000 (2001) Crim LR 124 (2001) 1 CAR 457 (2001) 3 All ER 463	09 November 2000	Court of Appeal	Woolf LCJ , Butterfield J , Steel J	Appeal (conviction and sentence)	Crime - fair hearing	Article 6	Common law test on safety of conviction	An unfair trial almost inevitably leads to unsafe conviction. If domestic approach differs from ECHR, HRA can remedy this defect: common law test in R v Chalkley and Jeffries [1999] 2 Cr App R 79 superseded; broader approach to what constitutes unsafe conviction in Mullen [1999]2 Cr App R 143 more appropriate in light of the HRA
R v (1) Offen, (2) McGilliard (3) McKeown, (4) Okwuegbunam, (5) Saunders LTL 9/11/2000 TLR 10/11/2000 ILR 17/11/2000 (2001) Crim LR 63 (2001) 1 WLR 253 (2001) 2 All ER 154 (2001) 1 CAR 372	09 November 2000	Court of Appeal	Woolf LCJ , Richards J , Steel J DBE	Appeal against sentence	Crime - sentencing	Article 3, Article 5, Article 7, Article 8	s2 Crime (Sentences) Act 1997 (now s109 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000)	i) Imposition of automatic life sentence could be disproportionate, therefore breaching Arts 5 & 3, if defendant poses no risk to public. S3 HRA compels less restrictive interpretation of ‘exceptional circumstances’ in s2 CSA 1997. ii) If offender constitutes significant risk, court can impose s2 life sentence without contravening ECHR
R v Canterbury Crown Court ex parte Howson-Ball (2001) Env LR 36	09 November 2000	High Court (Divisional Court)	Rose LJ , Elias J	Judicial review (substantive hearing)	Crime - procedure	Article 6	Duty to give reasons	Interests of fairness under both domestic and ECHR case-law required some analysis of evidence heard on appeal in giving reasons for a decision to uphold conviction
R (A) v Hertfordshire County Council LTL 22/3/2001 (2001) LGR 435 (2001) ACD 469	10 November 2000	High Court (Administrative Court)	Maurice Kay J	Local government; disciplinary proceedings	Disciplinary proceedings, Fairness	Article 6	Duty of fairness: test for bias / independent and impartial tribunal	i) Test for bias is whether there is “real danger of bias”: R v Gough (1993) AC 646; ii) Art 6 not breached by use by tribunal of local authority solicitor as legal advisor during disciplinary hearing
Pine v Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal	13 November 2000	High Court (Queen's Bench Division)	Crane J , Rafferty J , Woolf LCJ	Appeal against Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal	Professions	Article 6	Legal representation before disciplinary proceedings	Absence of legal representation before SDT does not result in breach Art 6(1) because hearing in proceedings to strike solicitor off Rolls is not complex so that can represent himself
Nillam Bhijay Sanjivi v East Kent Health Authority LTL 19/12/2000 TLR 19/12/2000 (2001) 59 BMLR 115	13 November 2000	High Court (Queen's Bench Division)	Hallett J	appeal on a point of law from a decision by the Registered Homes Tribunal.	Civil procedure	Article 6, Protocol 1 Article 1	Registered Homes Act 1984	S.21 RHA meant that the premises should be available for use. If the premises ceased to be available for use to the registered person, only possible construction of the Act was that registration must be cancelled. The Tribunal was not bound by factual situation at the time of lodging the appeal.
Re K (A Child) (Secure Accommodation Order) T.L.R. 29/11/2000	15 November 2000	Court of Appeal	Dame Butler-Sloss P , Judge LJ , Thorpe LJ	Appeal against secure accommodation order; application for declaration of incompatibility	Family	Article 5	s25 Children Act 1989	i) Secure accommodation order interferes with liberty under Art 5(1); ii) deprivation is permissible under Art 5(1)(d) because “educational supervision” is to be widely interpreted, including many aspects of local authority’s exercise of parental rights under an interim care order for a child’s benefit and protection; iii) this so even when empowering statutory provisions make no reference to educational supervision, so long as court making order keeps Art 5(1)(d) in mind in considering relevant criteria
R (H) v Mental Health Review Tribunal (North & East London)	15 November 2000	High Court (Administrative)	Crane J	Judicial review (substantive hearing); application for declaration of incompatibility	Mental health	Article 5	ss 72 & 73 Mental Health Act 1983	i) Inappropriate for court prospectively to grant a declaration of incompatibility merely because future proceedings involving applicant would raise an ECHR point; application for declaration of incompatibility in respect of ss72 & 73 MHA 1983 and Art 5 ECHR therefore not allowed; ii) natural justice at common law requires adequate notification of patient/her representative of any views formed by medical member in capacity as expert
Stevens v School of Oriental Studies and Others TLR 2/2/2001	16 November 2000	High Court (Chancery Division)	Pumfrey J	Application for permission to appeal against order staying proceedings	Civil procedure	Article 6	Right to relitigate without having paid costs of earlier action	Not inconsistent with Art 6(1) to prevent further litigation over same matter until costs occasioned by original unsuccessful action that had been struck out have been paid
Director General of Fair Trading v Proprietary Association of Great Britain & Another	17 November 2000	Restrictive Practices Court	Dr Penelope Rowlatt , James Scott , Lightman J	Applications by Respondents seeking recusal of I) Dr Penelope Rowlatt; ii) whole court, in context of DGFT’s proceedings in the Restrictive Practices Court	Independent and impartial tribunal	Article 6	The test for bias (R v Gough [1993] 2 All ER 724) established that the test was i) real danger of bias on the part of a tribunal member, rather than the more rigorous ii) reasonable apprehension of bias. The Court of Appeal had later commented that ii) might be more closely in harmony with ECHR jurisprudence (Locabail (UK) Ltd v Bayfield Properties Ltd (1999) 7 BHRC 583).	Post-2 October 2000, the test to be adopted for bias was the ECtHR’s i.e. whether there was a legitimate reason for, or fear of, lack of impartiality that was objectively justified (however slight the justification). To the extent that the test for bias, or independent and impartial tribunal, laid down by the ECHR or Commission is more rigorous than the Gough test, that test must be applied.
Biggin Hill Airport Ltd v Bromley London Borough Council TLR 21/11/00	21 November 2000	High Court (Chancery Division)	N. Strauss QC	Property	Civil procedure	Article 8	Construction of terms of lease between airport lessees and local authority	Residents’ application to join action between airport lessees and local authority rejected: 1) no HRA provision exists equivalent to s 3 requiring that private contracts be read compatibly; 2) environmental considerations were taken into account by LA, even if Art 8 had applied
R (on the application of Sean, Joseph and Michael McCann) v Manchester Crown Court 22/12/00 [2001] 1 W.L.R. 358 (2001) 165 J.P. 225 (2001) 98(2) L.S.G. 40 TLR 22/12/2000 2000 WL 1720367	22 November 2000	High Court (Queen's Bench Division)	Rafferty J , Woolf CJ	Judicial review (substantive)	Antisocial behaviour/sex offender orders	Article 6	s1 Crime and Disorder Act 1998	Under domestic and ECHR law, proceedings for antisocial behaviour orders are civil proceedings and not criminal
R v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Montana LTL 23/11/2000 ILR 29/11/2000 TLR 5/12/2000 (2001) 1 FLR 449 (2001) 1 WLR 552 (2001) HRLR 8	23 November 2000	Court of Appeal	Schiemann LJ , Swinton Thomas LJ , Tucker HHJ	Judicial review (appeal against dismissal of application for permission)	Nationality	Article 14, Article 8	s2(1) British Nationality Act 1981 Home Secretary’s discretion under s.3(1) of the BNA 1981	Home Secretary not in breach of Art 8 or 14 in exercising discretion to refuse British nationality to illegitimate child born abroad to British father, even when British nationality granted as of right to legitimate children born abroad to a British parent, and to illegitimate children born abroad to a British mother
Wilson v First County Trust TLR 06.12.00	23 November 2000	Court of Appeal	Sir Andrew Morritt V-C , Chadwick LJ , Rix LJ	Appeal	Consumer credit	Article 6, Protocol 1 Article 1	s127(3) Consumer Credit Act 1974	S127(3) breaches Art 6(1) because the absolute bar to enforcement in s127(3) for agreements that do not contain prescribed terms is disproportionate. Though requirement in Prot 1 Art 1 that deprivation of property must be prescribed by law satisfied, s127(3) does not strike fair balance between the community and individual’s rights. Declaration of incompatibility made
Ronald Wilson v Chief Constable of Lancashire Constabulary LTL 23/11/2000 (Unreported elsewhere)	23 November 2000	Court of Appeal	Mance LJ , Thorpe LJ , Schiemann LJ	appeal against dismissal of a claim for damages for wrongful arrest/ false imprisonment	Tort	Article 5	n/a	Although arrest took place pre-HRA ‘ there is at least a presumption that s.28(3) of PACE was intended to comply with Article 5(2)’. Court was willing to interpret PACE in accordance with provisions of the Convention. Court concluded ECtHR jurisprudence gave relaxed construction of Art 5(2) concerning time to informing an individual of the reasons for his arrest.
Medcalf v (1) Mardell (2) Kemp (3) BBC (4) The Terry Mardell Organization (2001) PNLR 372	24 November 2000	Court of Appeal	Peter Gibson LJ , Wilson J , Schiemann LJ	Claimant’s application for wasted costs orders against defendants’ Counsel	Civil procedure, Fairness	Article 6	Court Act 1981 s51	According to their Code of Conduct, the barristers could not have allowed the draft notice of appeal to go forward on the basis of material available to them but which could not be put before the court. There was therefore no unfairness to the barristers under Art 6(1) in their being unable to reveal privileged or confidential material.
R (Edison First Power Ltd) v (1) Secretary of State for Trade, Environment and the Regions (2) Central Valuation Officer	27 November 2000	High Court (Administrative)	Carnwarth J	Judicial review (substantive hearing)	Taxation	Protocol 1 Article 1	Central Rating Lists Regulations 1994 (SI 1994 No 3121) Electricity Supply Industry (Rateable Values Order) 1994	i) Double tax assessment permitted by relevant statutes and SIs; ii) ECHR not engaged since Order and events arose long before 02.10.00; iii) general ECHR principles do not add significantly to the common law principles relevant in the circumstances
R v Calum Ian Mac Leod LTL 30/11/2000 TLR 20/12/2000 (2001) Crim LR 589	29 November 2000	Court of Appeal	Kennedy LJ , Alliott J , Bell J	Appeal against conviction	Crime - independent and impartial tribunal	Article 6	Effect of contempt of court hearing on fairness of criminal trial	Art 6 does not add to English law requirement that proceedings be conducted fairly before independent and impartial tribunal
Khalid Al-Fawwaz v Governor of HM Prison Brixton LTL 30/11/2000 TLR 22/12/2000 (2001) 1 WLR 1234 (2001) 4 All ER 149	30 November 2000	High Court	Buxton LJ , Elias J	Habeas corpus	Extradition	Article 5	sch1 Extradition Act 1989; evidence sufficient to justify committal	Neither domestic law nor ECHR require that the review of lawfulness of detention entail full trial of the issues at committal stage as full trial to follow
(1) IR (2) JR v (1) RK (2) H (3) Local Authority 1; Local Authority 2 v G (By his Guardian Ad Litem the Official Solicitor) (2001) 1 FLR 646	04 December 2000	High Court (Family Division)	Butler-Sloss P	Applications by two local authorities to the High Court for guidance in adoption proceedings	Family - adoption	Article 6, Article 8	Children Act 1989 Adoption Act 1976 Adoption Rules 1989 Adoption Agencies Regulations	A local authority had a duty under s20 & s22 CA 1989, so far as reasonably practicable to ascertain both parents' wishes and give them due consideration in any decision about the child. In general, therefore, judges should give directions to inform natural fathers of adoption proceedings unless, on the particular facts of the case, it was inappropriate to do so. Both domestic statute and case law, and Convention jurisprudence suggested this conclusion.
R v Smith TLR 20/12/2000 LTL 26/2/2001 (2001) 1 WLR 1031 (2001) 2 CAR 1	05 December 2000	Court of Appeal	Otton LJ , Hidden J , Sir Richard Tucker	Appeal against conviction	Crime - evidence	Article 5, Article 6	Public Interest Immunity applications	No breach of equality of arms principle in Art 6(1) in admitting evidence disclosed to judge during ex parte public interest immunity hearing but which is not disclosed to the defence

Commentary on case-law developments under HRA 1998

Commentary (EHRLR [2001] Issue 6)

Pages: [ Previous < | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | > Next ]

This database of cases compiles the series of Tables of Cases produced by HRA Research Project and published in the European Human Rights Law Review. The tables include cases reported in LAWTEL Human Rights interactive and Butterworths Human Rights Direct from case transcripts available since 2 October 2000. The table does not include cases from Northern Ireland or from Scotland, except judgments before the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council which are likely to have general effect.

* This table was also contributed to by Elena Martin Salgado

HRARP Associates login