Secretary of State for the Home Department (Appellant) v MN and KY (Respondent) – Supreme Court
Secretary of State for the Home Department (Appellant) v MN and KY (Respondent) [2014] UKSC 30 (YouTube)
Supreme Court, 21st May 2014
Secretary of State for the Home Department (Appellant) v MN and KY (Respondent) [2014] UKSC 30 (YouTube)
Supreme Court, 21st May 2014
‘The family of a teenage soldier who died after being shot twice in the head at the Deepcut barracks have been denied access to a cache of files they believe could shed light on his death, the Guardian can reveal.’
The Guardian, 26th May 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘A man whose wife told him to “go die in battlefield” in a text message as he went off to fight in Syria has become the first person in the UK to be convicted of terrorist offences in connection with the conflict.’
Daily Telegraph, 20th May 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘Boundary disputes are rarely cost effective and the courts often make orders that make them disproportionately costly for the winner as well as the loser. Two recent cases demonstrate that risk and the importance of fully exploring and considering the available and/or potential evidence as early as possible.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 7th May 2014
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
‘Met Police officers are to start wearing cameras on their uniforms as part of plans to boost transparency and accelerate convictions.’
BBC News, 8th May 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘Judges should warn juries about the common misconceptions people have about rape before they are allowed to hear any evidence, two of the leading figures in the fight against sex crime say today.’
The Independent, 6th May 2014
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘Earlier this week, the parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights has published its report on The implications for access to justice of the Government’s proposals to reform judicial review (HL 174 HC 868 2013-14). The report is, perhaps unsurprisingly, generally critical of the proposals and of the way in which they have been or are being introduced. I have already summarised the proposals and commented on some of them in earlier posts. In this post, I draw attention to some key passages in the JCHR’s report, commenting on them briefly and, at the end of the piece, offering some reflections on some of the underlying constitutional issues highlighted by the Committee.’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 1st May 2014
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org
‘The first ever case allowing vulnerable victims and witnesses to give evidence ahead of the trial will start tomorrow.’
Ministry of Justice, 28th April 2014
Source: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-justice
‘Vulnerable witnesses can give evidence before a trial starts from Monday as part of a pilot scheme in three Crown Courts in England.’
BBC News, 28th April 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘Although a tribunal adjudicating on an asylum appeal did not have power, in the absence of express statutory provision, to exclude relevant evidence in the form of records of the asylum applicant’s interviews, it was required by the common law principle of fairness to consider with care how much weight should be attached to such evidence, having regard to the circumstances in which it came into existence, and the extent to which reliance could properly be placed on the applicant’s answers.’
WLR Daily, 9th April 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Former Commons deputy speaker’s acquittal suggests CPS may be too willing to bring charges when evidence is not very strong’
The Guardian, 10th April 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Sex attacker Kelvyn Lester, 47, declined to take medication for erectile dysfunction so officers could photograph his penis for an identification procedure.’
Daily Telegraph, 7th April 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘An application for permission to appeal against a conviction on grounds of previous incompetent representation by solicitors or counsel should not be made without taking proper steps to inquire whether there was a cogent objective basis for the proposed ground of appeal. It was impermissible to rely alone on the word of the defendant.’
WLR Daily, 19th March 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘R (on the application of British Sky Broadcasting Limited) (Respondent) v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (Appellant) [2014] UKSC 17. This was an appeal from a ruling by the Administrative Court that it was procedurally unfair, and therefore unlawful, for BSkyB to have had a disclosure order made against it without full access to the evidence on which the police’s case was based and the opportunity to comment on or challenge that evidence.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 13th March 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘On the hearing of an application by a police officer for a production order under section 9 of, and Schedule 1 to, the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, seeking access to journalistic material held by a news organisation for the purposes of an investigation into an alleged offence, the court could not have regard to evidence adduced by the police in support of the application which had not been disclosed to the news organisation.’
WLR Daily, 12th March 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘David Bedingfield of 4 Paper Buildings charts the recent history of scientific research into serious non-accidental head injuries suffered by babies and the response of the family and criminal courts in England and Wales.’
Family Law week, 11th March 2014
Source: www.familylawweek.co.uk
‘In determining whether an individual, whose conviction had been quashed on the basis of new evidence, qualified for compensation under section 133 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 on the ground of miscarriage of justice, the Secretary of State for Justice was required to make a decision by applying the statutory test in accordance with Supreme Court guidance to the facts of the particular case. Those facts could include events which postdated the quashing of the conviction in the event that further facts of relevance to the application of the statutory test arose. The Secretary of State might come to his own view, having regard to the terms of the judgment by the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) quashing the conviction, and provided the decision did not conflict with that judgment. The decision was then amenable to judicial review on conventional grounds of challenge, not merely because the court would have reached a different view. Save in exceptional circumstances, it should not be necessary for the court to engage in a detailed review of the facts.’
WLR Daily, 27th February 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Anita Beeres was convicted of assault for beating her partner John Leeson with a baseball bat during an argument at her home. Mr Leeson himself did not complain nor did he give evidence. (History does not relate how then Ms Beeres was arrested.) The only evidence against Ms Beeres was her confession, first at the time of her arrest and then again when interviewed at the police station.’
Criminal Law and Justice Weekly, 28th February 2014
Source: www.criminallawandjustice.co.uk
‘A coroner’s ruling into the death of a soldier who said she had been raped and bullied has been unexpectedly delayed after lawyers for the military revealed they had uncovered new documents, including a reference to a diary and mobile phones the woman’s family say were never passed to them.’
The Guardian, 24th February 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk