‘What you say to your lawyers is truly confidential; no-one, not even a regulator or prosecutor can see it. This is protected by the right to privacy under Article 8, and the right to a fair trial under Article 6 (which includes the right to access to lawyers).’
Legal Week, 13th August 2014
Source: www.legalweek.com
‘Dominic Grieve warns that a veto on European Court of Human Rights rulings would be a ‘disaster’ and would would place Britain in ‘great difficulty in terms of our international standing on human rights’.’
Daily Telegraph, 13th August 2014
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
‘Britain’s blanket ban denying all prisoners the vote is a breach of human rights, European judges have ruled – but those jailed will not receive any costs or compensation.’
The Independent, 12th August 2014
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘Guidance given on the approach to a “streamlined” process to deal with all deprivation of liberty (“DoL”) cases in a timely but just and fair way which was compliant with article 5 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.’
WLR Daily, 7th August 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
The role of judges in human rights jurisprudence: a comparison of the Australian and UK experience (PDF)
Lord Neuberger
Supreme Court of Victoria, Melbourne, 8th August 2014
Source: www.supremecourt.uk
‘The European court of human rights (ECHR) has ruled that prisoners who have not been allowed to vote should not be paid compensation.’
The Guardian, 12th August 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) is due to rule on whether prisoners who have been denied the vote should get compensation.’
BBC News, 12th August 2014
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
M v Times Newspapers Ltd and others [2014] EWCA Civ 1132; [2014] WLR (D) 371
‘The decision of a court to allow publication of a report which might lead to the identification of a person who had been arrested but not charged with any offence and was not a party to criminal proceedings would not be interfered with unless the court, in carrying out the evaluative exercise of balancing the competing public interest of freedom of expression in a report of court proceedings against the person’s right to private and family life, had erred in principle or reached a conclusion which was plainly wrong.’
WLR Daily, 1st August 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘At the time of the decisions in Manchester City Council v Pinnock [2011] 2 AC 104 and Hounslow v Powell [2011] 2 AC 186 it was thought that a seismic shock wave would be sent through the Courts requiring them in every claim for possession of residential premises by a public sector landlord to undertake a time consuming balancing exercise to assess the “proportionality” of making an order for possession. The Courts, it was thought, would be overwhelmed. This has in fact not proved to be the case. The County Court has become adept at weeding out the weak cases early on and even where the article 8 point is run to trial the Court has, by and large, been robust in its approach. The one issue which has remained unresolved for a surprisingly long time is the question of the extent to which the principles set out in Powell and Pinnock would apply in a possession claim where the land owner is a private individual and not part of the public sector.’
Hardwicke Chambers, 4th August 2014
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
‘One of the most senior judges in England and Wales has thrown down a direct challenge to the government over legal aid by suggesting courts spend money in defiance of Ministry of Justice cuts to ensure justice is done.’
The Guardian, 6th August 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Human Rights analysis: What does the future hold for human rights in the UK? Stephanie Harrison QC at Garden Court Chambers warns repealing the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA 1998) would be a seriously retrograde step, that would reverberate around the world.’
Garden Court Chambers Blog, 6th August 2014
Source: www.gclaw.wordpress.com
‘A man arrested but never charged over sexual offences has failed to persuade the Court of Appeal that newspapers should be barred from identifying him.’
Law Society’s Gazette, 5th August 2014
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘Where there was a real likelihood that a prisoner would serve a sentence in personal space of less than three metres, a serious issue of breach of article 3 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms arose, without the need for other aggravating features and despite the good faith of the Government in seeking to address a problem of historic inadequacy in the prison estate.’
WLR Daily, 30th July 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘In possession proceedings the court should approach a defence based on disability discrimination under section 15 of the Equality Act 2010 in the same way as it would approach one based on article 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as scheduled to the Human Rights Act 1998.’
WLR Daily, 30th July 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Coventry and others (Respondents) v Lawrence and another (Appellants) [2014] UKSC 46 (YouTube)
Supreme Court, 23rd July 2014
‘This is an important summary of the principles applicable to HR damages, particularly in circumstances where there have been other payments already made arguably in respect of the acts in question. So it should be first port of call if you have an HR damages problem, not least because it gathers all the learning together.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 27th July 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘When will a court order an inquiry into the deaths in combat of soldiers serving overseas? Following recent judgments of the English and Strasbourg courts extending the application of the European Convention on Human Rights to zones of armed conflict overseas in certain circumstances, the question is likely to arise frequently over the coming years. In R(Long), the Divisional Court strongly endorsed the doctrine of combat immunity and appeared to set its face against the recent rise in claims against the MoD by soldiers deployed abroad and their next of kin.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 27th July 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘The UK’s highest court will rule on a landmark decision of whether illegal immigrants should be deprived of fundamental workers’ rights, following the appeal of a Nigerian national who was trafficked into the UK. Judges from the Supreme Court, including Britain’s most senior female judge Lady Hale, will deliver the verdict on Wednesday in a case which could set an important precedent for the rights of workers found to be treated as modern-day slaves.’
The Independent, 27th July 2014
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘Coventry v. Lawrence [2014] UKSC 13, 23 July 2014, read judgment and Austin v. Miller Argent [2014] EWCA Civ 1012, 21 July 2014. Two important cases in the last few days showing how difficult it is to find a fair way to litigate private nuisance cases. Most of these claims have a modest financial value, but may raise complex factual and expert issues, even before you get to the law. The first case I shall deal with, Coventry, shows the iniquities of the recently departed system. The second, Austin, the dangers of the new.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 23rd July 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
McDonald and others v McDonald: [2014] EWCA Civ 1049; [2014] WLR (D) 336
‘Where a private landlord sought a possession order under section 21(4) of the Housing Act 1988 the tenant could not resist the making of the order on the ground that it would be disproportionate under article 8.2 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.’
WLR Daily, 24th July 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025