Should the Decision of the Foreign Secretary be Justiciable?
Louise Christian, Senior Consultant and Head of Public Law, Christian Khan Solicitors
Inner Temple Reader’s Lecture Series, 18th February 2013
Source: www.innertemple.org.uk
“Swift v. Secretary of State for Justice, Court of Appeal, 18 February 2013. Ms Swift lost her live-in partner in an accident at work caused by negligence. She was pregnant with her partner’s child, but had only been living with him for 6 months. Had she been with him for 2 years, she could have claimed damages for his death under section 1(3) of the Fatal Accidents Act – set out at [1] of the CA judgment. She would then have been a ‘dependant’ as defined under the FAA. So she argued that her rights under Articles 8 (family) and 14 (discrimination) of the ECHR were not properly respected by the law governing damages for the death of a relative – there was no justification for this stark cut-off – 1 year 11 months no claim, 2 years a claim. The judge refused to grant a declaration of incompatibility between the ECHR and the Fatal Accidents Act, and the Court of Appeal has just upheld his decision.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 18th March 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
Are Bills of Rights Necessary in Common Law Systems?
Justice Dyson Heydon AC
Inner Temple Reader’s Lecture Series, 21st January 2013
Source: www.innertemple.org.uk
“Esther Lieu, a Pupil at Coram Chambers, and Adam Weiss, Legal Director, The AIRE Centre, explain the ECtHR’s recent decision in Raw v France which considered, amongst other matters, the enforcement of court orders and the circumstances in which a parent could represent their children in Strasbourg proceedings.”
Family Law Week, 18th March 2013
Source: www.familylawweek.com
“The recent case of Birmingham CC v Beech contains a wealth of legal issues but sadly for the Defendant, none of them was decided in her favour. Mrs Beech’s parents had been joint tenants of a 3 bedroom property at 31 Tilshead Close, Birmingham since 1967. Mrs B’s father passed away in 1994 and her mother succeeded to the tenancy. Mrs B moved in to the property with her new partner in 2007 in order to provide care for her mother. Between 2008 and 2009, five offers of accommodation were made to Mrs B and these were refused for a variety of reasons. Mrs B’s request for her name to be added to the tenancy for Tilshead Close was also refused.”
NearlyLegal, 17th March 2013
Source: www.nearlylegal.co.uk
“The Supreme Court could use secret evidence in a ruling for the first time in a landmark case this week despite previously banning such material from civil courts.”
Daily Telegraph, 18th March 2013
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“David Anderson QC, the Independent Reviewer of terrorism legislation, has released his first report into the operation of Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures, introduced in 2011 with the aim of protecting the public from persons believed to have engaged in terrorism, but who can neither be prosecuted nor deported.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 14th March 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“Police face having to rethink their whole strategy for public demonstrations after judges ruled today that the surveillance they placed a peaceful protester under was unlawful.”
The Independent, 14th March 2013
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“UK’s most senior female judge says withdrawing from Strasbourg human rights court would require Britain to exit EU.”
The Guardian, 14th March 2014
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“A paralysed road accident victim has won the right to continue the right-to-die campaign started by locked-in syndrome sufferer Tony Nicklinson, who died last year.”
The Guardian, 13th March 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“This week, statements about the role of Parliamentary government in ensuring our liberties seems to die on our lips, while judges seem to enjoy an increasingly high profile in promoting human rights and mitigating the apparent harshness of government schemes. Roll back the clock a few centuries, however, and you find the popular view of the judiciary as self-serving, or delighting in pointless legal technicalities at the expense of justice. The future seemed to require more Parliamentary statutes and less work by judges.”
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 13th March 2013
Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk
“Dominic Raab MP has tabled an amendment to the Crime and Courts Bill which if passed would stop foreign criminals from using Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the right respect for private and family life) to prevent their deportation. The amendment has significant support.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 12th March 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“This was an application for judicial review, and a claim under the Human Rights Act 1998, in respect of the defendant’s decision to disclose allegations of neglect and ill-treatment of care home residents in an Enhanced Criminal Records Certificate dated 12th October 2012.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 12th March 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“UK justice secretary Chris Grayling’s call for the repeal of the Human Rights Act 1998 has led to claims that he is betraying British values, and damaging Britain’s reputation abroad. But it is time for a grown-up debate about what, exactly, this piece of legislation has done to enhance our civil liberties and fundamental freedoms.”
Hardwick Chambers, 11th March 2013
Source: www.hardwicke.co.uk
“Radical preacher Abu Qatada must remain in custody following his arrest for allegedly breaching his bail conditions, a judge has ruled.”
The Guardian, 10th March 2013
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Theresa May is wrong to claim that judges should be more willing to deport
foreign criminals, according to Helena Kennedy QC.”
Daily Telegraph, 7th March 2013
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“The current system for human rights protection in the UK is once again under siege. In the last week, statements were made indicating that the Conservative Party’s manifesto for the next election would include major reforms to current arrangements. Chris Grayling, Justice Secretary and Lord Chancellor, declared that a future Conservative Government would repeal the UK Human Rights Act 1998 ‘and start[] again’, suggesting that it would be replaced by alternative legislation. Theresa May, Home Secretary, announced that the manifesto would include a promise to withdraw the UK from the European Convention on Human Rights.”
UK Constitutional Law Group, 7th March 2013
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org
“In a rare public intervention Lord Neuberger, President of the UK Supreme Court, has flagged three important issues that should be of concern to us all.”
UK Human Rights Blog, 6th March 2013
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
“The debate over the place of human rights in UK constitutional law continues to run and run. The Home Secretary, Theresa May MP, has recently criticised the manner in which UK judges are interpreting the right to family life protected by Article 8 of the ECHR. A private members bill tabled by Tory MP Charlie Elphicke, the Human Rights Act 1998 (Repeal and Substitution) Bill, which would de-incorporate Convention rights and replace them with diluted ‘British’ replacements, received its Second Reading on the 1st March 2013. Furthermore, at the time of writing, the Mail on Sunday is quoting Theresa May again to the effect that the next Tory election manifesto will include a commitment to withdrawing from the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights, de-incorporating Convention rights, or some such equivalent measure.”
UK Constitutional Law Group, 4th March 2013
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org
Perry v Nursing and Midwifery Council [2013] EWCA Civ 145; [2013] WLR (D) 88
“Fairness did not require that a respondent to an allegation of unfitness to practise his profession had to be given an opportunity to give evidence as to the substance of that allegation before a tribunal considering whether to make an interim suspension order or other interim order under a legislative scheme, such as that contained in the Nursing and Midwifery Order 2001, since that was not what the statutory scheme envisaged or what fairness required at the interim stage. Guidance was given as to the procedure to be followed by a committee, considering whether to make an interim order pending the substantive hearing of a complaint against a member of the profession, in order to satisfy the fairness requirement.”
WLR Daily, 28th February 2013
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2024