‘Apple’s appeal against a UK government demand to be able to access its customers’ most highly encrypted data is set to be considered at a secret hearing at the High Court on Friday, the BBC understands.’
BBC News, 12th March 2025
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘Earlier last month, The Washington Post reported that Apple, a technology company known for emphasizing privacy as one of its key selling points, had been ordered by the U.K. government to create a back door that would enable the retrieval of all content uploaded by any Apple user worldwide to iCloud. iCloud is a cloud storage service that is encrypted by default, and its users may also opt in to the use of end-to-end encryption, an additional layer of security ensuring that only the user (and not even Apple) can access the stored data.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 13th March 2025
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘Magistrates’ courts conducting family justice are now part of the Family Court, established in 2014, and subject to the same rules as those presided over by district, circuit and High Court judges. Under those rules, accredited media reporters and ‘legal bloggers’ (see below) are entitled to attend hearings even if they take place in private, though they can’t report anything without the court’s permission.’
Transparency Project, 24th September 2024
Source: transparencyproject.org.uk
‘A killer who stabbed a woman 60 times during sex will give evidence at his parole hearing in private, even though an application had been granted for it to be held in public.’
BBC News, 16th July 2024
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘The Government’s response to the delayed Ouseley report was finally published on 29 May 2024, the last day before the dissolution of Parliament. In this piece a leading Special Advocate describes that response as underwhelming, especially after so long.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 30th May 2024
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
’25 June 2023 was the tenth anniversary of section 6 of the Justice and Security Act 2013 (the JSA) coming into force. It was an anniversary that, as far as I know, passed unremarked. Nevertheless it was a remarkable anniversary – though not a cause for celebration. This is because it marked 5 years since the date that Parliament had required a review of the controversial procedures under the Act, involving secret closed hearings – and yet the Government’s response to the recommendations from that review was still awaited. Even now, no Government response has been forthcoming, nearly a year after the long-delayed report was published, despite the urgency attached to some of the recommendations.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 30th October 2023
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘When an individual challenges a decision made by a public body (as happens in immigration cases), it is generally considered a fundamental feature of natural justice and fairness that they must be shown the evidence relied on by the decision-maker.’
Richmond Chambers, 24th March 2023
Source: immigrationbarrister.co.uk
‘The Vice President of the Court of Protection has issued guidance on Court of Protection ‘closed hearings’ and ‘closed material’.’
Local Government Lawyer, 9th February 2023
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘The disciplinary regime for judges is set to become quicker and clearer but – unlike for solicitors and barristers – hearings will remain behind closed doors, under plans published yesterday.’
Legal Futures, 16th November 2021
Source: www.legalfutures.co.uk
‘The government is considering whether to hold a full public inquiry into the death of Dawn Sturgess from the nerve agent Novichok in Wiltshire in 2018.’
BBC News, 23rd September 2021
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘The police force investigating the Guildford pub bombs has been accused of a conflict of interest after it took legal action to keep archives closed. More than 700 files on the 1974 IRA bombs had been due to open this year but were retained by the Home Office. Inquest papers have shown Surrey Police applied for the files to stay closed.’
BBC news, 2nd December 2020
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘A man whose grandfather has just been released from prison – after killing his wife 35 years ago – has told the BBC the parole process in England and Wales is “secretive” and “coy”.’
BBC News, 20th October 2020
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘In R (Reprieve & Ors) v Prime Minister [2020] EWHC 1695 (Admin), the High Court made a preliminary ruling that Article 6(1) of the ECHR does not apply to the forthcoming judicial review of the Government’s decision not to establish a public inquiry into allegations that the UK intelligence services were involved in the torture, mistreatment and rendition of detainees in the aftermath of 9/11. It was further held that the claimants are not entitled to the level of disclosure of open material outlined in SSHD v AF (No 3) [2009].’
UK Human Rights Blog, 9th July 2020
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘The ‘Third Direction case’, soon to be brought before the Court of Appeal, concerns the lawfulness of a previously secret national security policy of the UK Government. The policy authorises agents of the Security Service (MI5) to engage in criminal activity, which the claimants allege include the carrying out of torture and murder. Hearings on the case were held in November last year in the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT), a specialist tribunal which adjudicates complaints on state surveillance and the conduct of the Security Services (MI5, MI6 and GCHQ). The IPT produced a judgment remarkably quickly, published in December.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 7th July 2020
Source: ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘A judicial review aimed at overturning a decision to ditch a judge-led inquiry into the involvement of British intelligence in torture and rendition will be heard in secret after a challenge involving two MPs failed.’
The Guardian, 30th June 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘In QX v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2020], the UK High Court reached a landmark preliminary decision that ECHR Article 6 applies to the judicial review of obligations imposed under a Temporary Exclusion Order (TEO). The Court further held that the claimant is entitled to the level of disclosure outlined in SSHD v AF (No 3) [2009]. This judgement sets a welcome precedent for applying Article 6 to closed material proceedings under the Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015. It is also consistent with the procedural protections applied to the former regime for control orders, now succeeded by TPIM notices. The reasons given for applying the AF (No 3) standard of disclosure, however, demonstrate the persistence of a limited and discretionary approach to disclosure obligations in national security litigation.’
Oxford Human Rights Hub, 4th June 2020
Source: ohrh.law.ox.ac.uk
‘A new practice direction clarifying when civil courts may derogate from the principle of open justice to conduct hearings remotely in private has been published today.’
Litigation Futures, 25th March 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The Government has still not implemented the review of Closed Procedures that Parliament had dictated should take place when passing the Justice and Security Act 2013. A review is required to cover the first five years after the Act came into force, and should have been completed “as soon as reasonably practicable” thereafter. That period expired in June 2018, and there are still no signs of a reviewer being appointed.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 28th January 2020
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
© Inner Temple Library 2025