R v AM [2010] ACTSC 149 (15 November 2010)The ACT Supreme Court recently considered to what extent freedom of conscience under the ACT Human Rights Act 2004 (‘the HR Act’) influenced the interpretation of criminal offences.  An applicant sought to argue that her consciousness beliefs should provide her a defence to otherwise criminal conduct, and if not, that the Court should issue a declaration of incompatibility on the basis the relevant offence was inconsistent with the HR Act.

DPP v Piscopo [2010] VSC 498 and DPP v Rukandin [2010] VSC 499 (12 November 2010)The recent decisions in DPP v Piscopo [2010] VSC 498 and DPP v Rukandin [2010] VSC 499 provide further guidance concerning alcohol testing enforcement.  The two separate judgements, delivered simultaneously by Kyrou J, contain identical legal reasoning dealing with ss 49(1)(e), 55(1) and 55(9A) of the Road Safety Act 1986 (Vic).  The Court concluded that where police request a motorist to accompany them for the purpose of furnishing a sample of breath or blood, the motorist must be informed that they have to remain until that sample has been taken or until three hours after driving, whichever is sooner.

DPP v Ali & Anor (No 2) [2010] VSC 503 (10 November 2010)The Supreme Court of Victoria (Hargrave J) recently considered the operation of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic) in relation to an application to forfeit a family home that had been used in connection with a criminal offence.The Attorney-General and the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission both intervened to make submissions on the Charter issues.

During the coronial inquest into the fatal shooting of a teenager by the Victoria Police, the Victorian State Coroner considered an application by the Chief Commissioner of Police (‘CCP’) for an order prohibiting the publication of certain documents.  The application was made pursuant to s 73(2)(b) of the Coroners Act 2008, which states that a coroner must order that a report about any documents, material or evidence provided to the coroner as part of an inquest not be published if the coroner reasonably believes that the publication would be contrary to 'the public interest'. In deciding whether or not to grant the application, the Coroner considered how s 73(2)(b) ought to be approached in light of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic), in particular, the impact of the Charter in weighing up what is in the 'public interest.'

Wells v The Queen (No 2) [2010] VSCA 294 (4 November 2010)The Court of Appeal dismissed this interlocutory criminal appeal.  The applicant in part sought a permanent stay of a criminal trial on the basis that the Charter rights relating to criminal proceedings (ss 24 and 25) were breached.  In dismissing the appeal, the Court of Appeal commented that it would rarely entertain Charter arguments in interlocutory appeals, due to their complexity and the prospect of causing delays in criminal trials.

Manchester City Council v Pinnock [2010] UKSC 45 (3 November 2010)In this decision the UK Supreme Court was required to decide whether art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights requires a court to consider the reasonableness and proportionality of applications for possession of premises under the Housing Act 1996.

McCallum v South Africa, UN Doc CCPR/C/100/D/1818/2008 (2 November 2010)The Human Rights Committee has found that South Africa violated a prisoner's rights not to be tortured or treated in a cruel, inhuman or degrading manner and to be treated with humanity and respected when deprived of liberty.  South Africa was also found to have violated its obligation to investigate and remedy the violation of those rights.

British Columbia (Ministry of Education) v Moore, 2010 BCCA 478 (29 October 2010)Frederick Moore filed a human rights complaint against the Board of Trustees School Division and the Ministry of Education.  He alleged the Board and the Ministry had discriminated against his dyslexic son Jeffrey and other severely learning disabled (‘SLD’) students by failing to sufficiently accommodate their learning disabilities in the provision of educational services contrary to s 8(1) of the Human Rights Code, British Columbia's anti-discrimination act.

Canberra Fathers and Children Services Inc v Michael Watson [2010] ACAT 74 (29 October 2010)The ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal has found that an eviction from social housing that would result in homelessness is a breach of the right to be free from unlawful or arbitrary interference with the home.

Cadder v Her Majesty's Advocate (Scotland) [2010] UKSC 43 (26 October 2010)The United Kingdom Supreme Court has overturned convention and UK precedent by holding that admissions made by a detained suspect prior to charge, without legal representation, are incompatible with the right to a fair trial.  While this decision is contrary to the previous UK position, it is consistent with the European Court of Human Rights decision in Salduz v Turkey (2009) 49 EHRR 19.

King v Secretary of State for Justice [2010] EWHC 2522 (Admin) (13 October 2010)The High Court of Justice has held that disciplinary proceedings may constitute the determination of civil rights, invoking the rights under art 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights.  The Court held that a prisoner does have a civil right to association, but that a temporary restriction on this right may not constitute an interference with the right.  It also held that the lack of impartiality of an adjudicator of disciplinary proceedings did not necessarily amount to a lack of procedural fairness.

McDonald, R (on the application of) v Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea [2010] EWCA Civ 1109 (13 October 2010)The England and Wales Court of Appeal has held that the failure to provide an elderly individual with disability with a carer to assist her to use a commode during the night, and instead requiring that the individual use incontinence pads and special sheets (in circumstances where the individual was not incontinent), did not breach the right to privacy in art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.