‘Sir Brian Leveson, the judge most famous for his report into press ethics, has said he does not consider himself “crushed by the European jackboot” when it comes to applying the European convention of human rights in British courts.’
The Guardian, 24th May 2015
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘A discrete but significant issue on costs recently came before the Court of Appeal in R (on the application of HS2 Action Alliance Ltd) v Secretary of State for Transport [2015] EWCA Civ 203.’
Law Society’s Gazette, 18th May 2015
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘The return of a majority Conservative government in last week’s general election in the UK has made the Conservative Party’s plans for reforming human rights law in the United Kingdom a likely prospect. It is recalled that on 3 October 2014, the Conservative Party published its policy document ‘Protecting Human Rights in the UK’ which sets out its proposal to repeal the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) and replace it with a new British Bill of Rights. In addition, the policy document also raised the prospect that the UK might withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).’
UK Constitutional Law Association, 15th May 2015
Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org/blog
‘The Conservatives’ manifesto says the party wants to scrap the Human Rights Act. David Cameron has appointed Michael Gove, the former education secretary, to be Justice Secretary. This mean he’ll have most of the responsibility for policy over the area.’
The Independent, 11th May 2015
Source: www.independent.co.uk
‘Michael Gove, the new justice secretary, is to press ahead with plans to scrap the Human Rights Act which could see Britain pull out of the European convention on human rights (ECHR) if the reforms are rejected by Strasbourg.’
The Guardian, 10th May 2015
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘On first glance, this was not a judgment about human rights. It concerned the definition of statelessness under article 1(1) of the 1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons, and raised issues of competence and jurisdiction in relation to EU citizenship. Its specific interest for human rights lawyers lies primarily in the observations about the principle of proportionality; and in where the case, which most certainly does raise human rights issues, is likely to go next.
UK Human Rights Blog, 31st March 2015
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘The supreme court has ruled that the government’s benefit cap, which limits unemployed claimants to £500 a week in total welfare payments, is lawful.’
The Guardian, 18th March 2015
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
‘Clive Anderson and guests get behind the political rhetoric to debate the potential impact on the rights of British citizens if the Government carries out a proposal to scrap the Human Rights Act and replace it with a “more British” Bill of Rights.’
BBC Unreliable Evidence, 24th January 2015
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘TTIP stands for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, a proposed trade agreement between the US, the EU, and various members of the EU including the UK. A sober account of its history and scope was produced for the HoC debate (here), and a rather less polite view is here from George Monbiot. ‘
UK Human Rights Blog, 23rd January 2015
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘If the UK press love a sex scandal and a good royal story, imagine what you get when you put the two together. This month the news broke that victims of Jeffrey Epstein, an American paedophile, were attempting to sue Prince Andrew alleging, amongst other things, that she was coerced into having sex with him when she was 17.’
Halsbury’s Law Exchange, 26th January 2015
Source: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk
‘A British withdrawal from the European Convention of Human Rights would be “devastating for Britain and human rights throughout Europe, says Dominic Grieve, sacked as Attorney General by David Cameron in July.’
UCL Constitution Unit, 10th December 2014
Source: www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit
In re S (A Child) (Abduction: Hearing the Child) [2014] EWCA Civ 1557; [2014] WLR (D) 522
‘Where the court was exercising it’s inherent jurisdiction relating to the abduction or retention of a child where neither the Hague Convention on the International Aspects of Child Abduction 1980, nor article 11(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/2003 (“Brussels II revised”) applied, the same principle of effective access to justice for a child as applied to cases involving the Convention and the Regulation was engaged and the court was obliged to consider whether and how to hear the child concerned.’
WLR Daily, 4th December 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Where a case fell within article 9(3) of the Aarhus Convention but was not a claim for judicial review and therefore not an “Aarhus Convention claim” within CPR r 45.41 it would be inappropriate for the court to relax the usual principles applying to the making of protective costs orders by nevertheless applying the costs protection regime introduced by rule 45.41.’
WLR Daily, 27th November 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Back to Aarhus and the constant problem we have in the UK making sure that the cost of planning and environmental litigation is not prohibitively expensive.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 1st December 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
Anxious Scrutiny (PDF)
Lord Sumption
Administrative Law Bar Association Annual Lecture, 4th November 2014
Source: www.supremecourt.uk
‘The last sentence of article 4(4) of the Convention on the Law Applicable to Contractual Obligations (Rome Convention) applied to a commission contract for the carriage of goods solely when the main purpose of the contract consisted in the actual transport of the goods concerned, which was for the referring court to verify. Where the law applicable to a contract for the carriage of goods could not be fixed under the second sentence of article 4(4), it had to be determined in accordance with the general rule laid down in article 4(1) that the law governing the contract was that of the country with which it was most closely connected. Where it was argued that a contract had a closer connection with a country other than that the law of which was designated by the presumption laid down in article 4(2), the national court had to compare the connections existing between that contract and the country whose law was designated by the presumption and the other country concerned. In so doing, the national court had to take account of the circumstances as a whole, including the existence of other contracts connected with the contract in question.’
WLR Daily, 23rd October 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
‘Last night’s discussion at Gray’s Inn Hall featured a panel with Dominic Grieve QC MP (formerly Attorney General), Lord Judge (formerly Lord Chief Justice), Bella Sankey (Policy Director, Liberty), Martin Howe QC (member of the Commission on a British Bill of Rights), David Anderson QC (Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation), all chaired by Shaun Ley of the BBC.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 9th October 2014
Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com
Regina (Hussein) v Secretary of State for Defence [2014] EWCA Civ 1087; [2014] WLR (D) 361
‘The policy of the Secretary of State for Defence permitting a technique involving the use of shouting by the armed forces when questioning captured persons was compatible with international law and did not inherently give rise to an unacceptable risk of breaching international law, in particular the prohibitions on inhumane treatment, threats, insults, or unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment under the Geneva Conventions.’
WLR Daily, 31st July 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
Regina (Buer) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] EWCA Civ 1109; [2014] WLR (D) 359
‘Article 13 of Decision No 1/80 adopted under the Agreement establishing an Association between the European Economic Community and Turkey did not apply to Turkish workers who were already sufficiently integrated into the work force of the host member state to enjoy rights under article 6(1) of the Decision.’
WLR Daily, 31st July 2014
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
© Inner Temple Library 2025