“The expansion of secret hearings into the civil courts, proposed by the government as a means of protecting national security, will deprive individuals of the right to a fair trial, a parliamentary select committee has been warned.”
The Guardian, 24th January 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Britain’s most secretive court has warned the government that plans to restrict open justice in sensitive civil claims cases are seriously flawed and likely to incur excessive costs. Criticising the central thrust of Ken Clarke’s justice and security green paper, judges and members of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal say proposals for expanding ‘closed material procedures’ into other courts have not been thought through sufficiently.”
The Guardian, 8th January 2012
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Government proposals to increase the number of court hearings held in secret, and in which parties can only see minimal evidence relied upon by the court, have been severely criticised by the ‘Special Advocates’ who play the central role in closed hearings.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 5th January 2012
Source: http://ukhumanrightsblog.com
Tariq v Home Office (JUSTICE and another intervening) [2011] UKSC 35; [2011] WLR (D) 229
“The closed material procedure provided in the statutory scheme established for employment tribunals was in principle compatible with European Union law and article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as scheduled to the Human Rights Act 1998.”
WLR Daily, 13th July 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“It was for Parliament, if it so decided, and not for the courts, to introduce a closed material procedure to replace the existing process developed by the common law for dealing with claims to public interest immunity in an ordinary civil claim for damages.”
WLR Daily, 13th July 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Al Rawi and others v Security Service and others [2010] EWCA Civ 482; [2010] WLR (D) 111
“It was not open to a court in England and Wales, in the absence of statutory power to do so or, arguably, agreement between the parties that the case should proceed on such a basis, to order a closed material procedure in respect of the trial of an ordinary civil claim such as a claim for damages for tort or breach of statutory duty.”
WLR Daily, 5th May 2010
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
Al Rawi and others v Security Service and others [2009] EWHC 2959 (QB); [2009] WLR (D) 335
It could be lawful and proper for a court to order that a closed material procedure (avoiding disclosure of material contrary to the public interest otherwise than to special advocates) be adopted in a civil claim for damages.
WLR Daily, 19th November 2009
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
“Lawyers for MI5 and MI6 have launched an unprecedented attempt to stop secret material being disclosed during a case brought by ex-Guantanamo Bay detainees.”
BBC News, 27th October 2009
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
“Where, in the interests of national security, the Secretary of State relied on closed material in a hearing under s 3(10) of the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 to justify his decision to make a control order, art 6(1) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as scheduled to the Human Rights Act 1998, would not be satisfied unless the controlee were given sufficient information on the case against him to enable him to give effective instructions to the special advocate appointed to represent him.”
WLR Daily, 11th June 2009
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
“Appeals from the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (‘SIAC’) were restricted to matters of law or irrationality. SIAC was entitled to have regard to closed material and to assurances given by their governments in concluding that appellants would not, if deported, face a real risk of inhuman treatment contrary to art 3 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms or violation of the right to a fair trial under art 6.”
WLR Daily, 18th February 2009
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
“When considering whether an applicant was at risk of torture or ill-treatment contrary to art 3 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms if deported to his home state on the ground of national security the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (‘SIAC”’ was entitled to have regard to closed as well as open material in scrutinising the case under the statutory scheme. A person who had been recognised as a refugee could lose his status under art 1F(c) of the Convention and Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees if he were guilty of acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations after recognition.”
WLR Daily, 30th July 2007
Source: www.lawreports.co.uk
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
© Inner Temple Library 2025