‘The law should be changed to make it clear that British courts are not obliged to implement judgments of the European court of human rights (ECHR), according to the former lord chief justice.’
The Guardian, 4th December 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘A Luton juror, who was jailed for contempt of court after carrying out research on the internet during a trial, is taking her case to Europe.’
BBC News, 5th December 2013
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
What’s the point of human rights? (PDF)
Lady Hale
Warwick Law Lecture, 28th November 2013
Source: www.supremecourt.gov.uk
‘The European court of human rights exceeds its legitimate powers, usurps the role of politicians and “undermines the democratic process”, one of the UK’s most senior judges has warned.’
The Guardian, 28th November 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘The recent story of three women being freed after an alleged 30 years held captive in a South London house has aroused enormous public interest. It is a shocking example of modern day slavery. Perhaps it is so shocking because we assume that the very practice of slavery no longer exists here; that it lives on only in the history books.’
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 2nd December 2013
Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk
‘The Supreme Court has clarified the principles to be applied when considering the welfare of children in deportation cases. The following summary is based on the Supreme Court’s Press Summary.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 29th November 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
Zoumbas v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] UKSC 74; [2013] WLR (D) 458
“The fact that the children of failed asylum seekers were not British citizens, and therefore had no right to education and health care in the United Kingdom, was relevant when assessing whether it was reasonable to expect them to live in another country if their parents were removed from the United Kingdom.”
WLR Daily, 27th November 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Zoumbas (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] UKSC 74 | UKSC 2013/0100 (YouTube)
Supreme Court, 27th November 2013
Bull and another (Appellants) v Hall and another (Respondents) [2013] UKSC 73 | UKSC 2012/0065 (YouTube)
Supreme Court, 27th November 2013
“One of Britain’s most senior judges said the rapid rise in the number of laws in recent years had been necessary as other modes of social control such as religion and old fashioned morality declined.”
Daily Telegraph, 28th November 2013
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
Preddy v Bull and another; Hall v Same: [2013] UKSC 73; [2013] WLR (D) 454
‘The refusal of hoteliers, who believed that sex outside marriage was sinful, to provide a same sex couple who were in a civil partnership with a double-bedded room because they were not married constituted unlawful discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation. The limitation on the hoteliers’ right to manifest their religion was justified as a proportionate means of achieving the legitimate aim of protecting the rights and freedoms of others.’
WLR Daily, 27th November 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘UK courts should stop deferring to the European court of human rights on every issue and develop their own rulings, according to Lord Justice Laws, the longest serving court of appeal judge.’
The Guardian, 27th November 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘The High Court has dismissed a claimant’s argument that a London borough had a duty to use the general power of competence to provide her with accommodation and subsistence support.’
Local Government Lawyer, 26th November 2013
Source: www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk
‘R (on the application of MK) v Barking and Dagenham London Borough Council. A judicial review raising the extent of a Council’s duties and powers under s.17 Children Act 1989 and s.1 Localism Act 2011 (the general power of competence) in providing housing for someone not otherwise eligible for housing assistance.’
NearlyLegal, 26th November 2013
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/
‘The Home Secretary was not under a duty to issue a direction for removal from the United Kingdom at the same time as refusing an application for an extension of limited leave to remain in the United Kingdom. A tribunal hearing an immigration appeal against a refusal of further leave to remain in the United Kingdom may consider additional grounds which had not been raised before the Home Secretary before the decision under appeal had been made but which had subsequently been raised in response to a one stop notice.’
WLR Daily, 20th November 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘This week, there are criticisms over the delay of inquiries both into the mistreatment of terrorism suspects and the Iraq War. Meanwhile, discussion continues over the relevance of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights for UK law, and a dying asylum seeker on hunger strike will not be released.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 24th November 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘Leicester CC v Shearer is a rare example of a successful public law defence to a claim for possession.”
NearlyLegal, 24th November 2013
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk/blog/
‘R (on the application of London Christian Radio Ltd & Christian Communications Partnerships) v Radio Advertising Clearance Centre (Respondent) & Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Interested Party) [2013] EWCA Civ 1495.The ban on Christian Radio’s proposed advert seeking data on the “marginalisation of Christians” in the workplace was lawful and did not constitute an interference with free speech, the Court of Appeal has ruled. When determining whether a radio or television advertisement was “political” fur the purposes of Section 321(2)(b) of the Communications Act 2003 the court should consider the text objectively; the motives of the advertiser were irrelevant.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 21st November 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘The Upper Tribunal has finally handed down its judgment in All Party Parliamentary Group on Extraordinary Rendition v IC & Foreign and Commonwealth Office [2013] UKUT 560 (AAC). It is a judgment of Charles and Burnett JJ and Judge Wikeley. The appeal was from an FTT judgment which is analysed in detail by Rachel Kamm here. That post also contains the background to the case. In essence, the request was made by the APPGER for information relating to the participation of the UK in the practice of extraordinary rendition.’
Panopticon, 22nd November 2013
Source: www.panopticonblog.com
© Inner Temple Library 2025