‘C (a child) [2016] EWCA Civ 798. This is the most recent in the long series of legal steps touching on the violent career of Ben Butler, recently convicted of the murder of his daughter, Ellie.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 9th August 2016
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Think carefully before you pack your holiday reading. As The Independent reported earlier this week, Faizah Shaheen was detained under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act last month after cabin crew on her Thomson Airways flight spotted her reading a book about Syria.’
The Independent, 7th August 2016
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘In this article I deal with the basics of the legal framework for the Prevent Duty. The simplest way of thinking about the Prevent Duty is visualisation. Imagining that you are the character at which Dirty Harry is pointing his gun in that film while uttering the words: “You’ve got to ask yourself one question: “do I feel lucky?”… Well do you punk?” The government has attempted to shift the publicity and legal risks from itself to the universities by use of the Prevent Duty. On the face of it universities have a dilemma: how to have due regard to the need to prevent people being drawn into terrorism, whilst taking all reasonably practicable steps to ensure free speech and academic freedom.’
Cloisters, 26th July 2016
Source: www.cloisters.com
‘The Court of Appeal dismissed the Secretary of State’s appeal challenging the Upper Tribunal’s decision that MSM would have been at risk on return to Somalia on the ground of political opinion. Exceptionally, the court went on to consider the modification of conduct issue in relation to imputed political opinion on an obiter basis, which gave rise to interesting analysis.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 22nd July 2016
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘The government’s Prevent strategy aimed at combating homegrown terrorism is stifling freedom of expression within the classroom and risks being counterproductive, a human rights report warns.’
The Guardian, 13th July 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
’17 years ago, the highest court in the UK declared that a policy prohibiting journalists from interviewing prisoners to uncover potential miscarriages of justice violated the right to free expression.’
RightsInfo, 8th July 2016
Source: www.rightsinfo.org
‘Three councils have successfully defended a High Court judicial review challenge brought by Jewish Human Rights Watch (JHRW) over motions passed in relation to the authorities’ business dealings and Israeli settlements.’
Local Government Lawyer, 28th June 2016
‘A feminist pornographer has hailed a victory for freedom of expression after she won her appeal against an order that had forced her to take down a sadomasochism fetish website.’
The Guardian, 6th June 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Minister for Internet Safety and Security addresses audience at the Google Zeitgeist Conference.’
Home Office, 26th May 2016
Source: www.gov.uk/home-office
‘Freedom of speech, often called freedom of expression, is thought of by many as the cornerstone of a liberal democracy.’
RightsInfo, 26th May 2016
Source: www.rightsinfo.org
‘Is the Supreme Court’s decision in PJS v NGN [2016] UKSC 26, [2016] All ER (D) 135 (May), as Lord Toulson suggests, out of touch with reality? Sara Mansoori, barrister at Matrix Chambers, considers the wider consequences of the case and suggests that even when information is in the public domain, the law of privacy can prevent repetition of that information where such repetition can cause unwarranted distress.’
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 25th May 2016
Source: www.halsburyslawexhange.co.uk
‘Mrs Justice Whipple dismissed one claim for judicial review, and refused permission to bring a further claim, in respect of decisions made by Southampton University regarding a proposed conference on the legality of the existence of Israel under international law. She held that the University had lawfully withdrawn its permission to hold the conference in April 2015, and refused permission to challenge the University’s subsequent decision to require the conference organisers to meet the conference’s security costs as a condition of allowing the conference to take place at a later date. The conference organisers had claimed that both decisions represented an unlawful interference with their Article 10 right to free expression and Article 11 right to free assembly.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 24th May 2016
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Writing a bad review online has always run a small risk of opening yourself up to a defamation claim. But few would expect to be told that they had to delete their review or face a lawsuit over another part of the law: copyright infringement.’
The Guardian, 23rd May 2016
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘I recently wrote on these pages criticising celebrity injunctions taken out to gag English newspapers, even when the stories were freely reported in other countries. The expensive celebrity game reminded me, I wrote, of the Spycatcher farce and the series of trials during which Margaret Thatcher tried to prevent British newspapers from publishing extracts from Peter Wright’s MI5 memoir, despite the book being freely obtainable outside England.’
Daily Telegraph, 22nd May 2016
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘Undergraduate law students at Oxford university are being issued with “trigger warnings” before lectures containing material deemed too “distressing” – a move which has drawn criticism from academics.’
The Independent, 10th May 2016
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘Campaigners and politicians have criticised Home Secretary Theresa May’s assertion that Britain should leave the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).’
The Independent, 25th April 2016
Source: www.independent.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024