Ciubotaru v Moldova [2010] ECHR 638 (27 April 2010)In Ciubotaru v Moldova, the European Court of Human Rights held that, along with such aspects as name, gender, religion and sexual orientation, an individual’s ethnic identity constitutes an essential aspect of his or her private life and identity.

F & Anor, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] UKSC 17 (21 April 2010)This case concerned lifetime reporting requirements for sex offenders.  The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom decided that while the requirements themselves were reasonable, imposing them without any possibility of review was not proportionate as it was impossible to rule out the possibility that some offenders would eventually be able to demonstrate they no longer posed a risk of reoffending.  The Court upheld a declaration of incompatibility under the Human Rights Act 1998 (UK).

Humberstone, R (on the application of) v Legal Services Commission [2010] EWHC 760 (Admin) (13 April 2010)Article 2 of the European Convention of Human Rights provides that the right to life is a fundamental human right that shall be protected by law.

Tillman v Australia, UN Doc CCPR/C/98/D/1635/2007 (12 April 2010)Fardon v Australia, UN Doc CCPR/C/98/D/1629/2007 (12 April 2010)The UN Human Rights Committee has held that the post-sentence detention of two men convicted of sexual offences, Kenneth Tillman in New South Wales and Robert Fardon in Queensland, was incompatible with the prohibition against arbitrary detention under art 9(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

  Director of Housing v Sudi [2010] VCAT 328 (31 March 2010)Justice Bell, sitting as President of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal, has held that the Director of Housing acted unlawfully under s 38(1) of the Charter in seeking, without adequate justification, to evict a refugee family from social housing in breach of their right to family and the home under s 13(a).  His Honour further held that this unlawfulness invalidated the Director’s application for a possession order under s 344 of the Residential Tenancies Act.

Saeedi, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Ors [2010] EWHC 705 (Admin) (31 March 2010)The England and Wales High Court recently held that the proposed transfer of an asylum applicant to Greece was not incompatible with art 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights or similar rights guaranteed under European Union law.

In the matter of a Major Review of Derek Ernest Percy [2010] VSC 179 (31 March 2010)Derek Percy, the only remaining prisoner in Victoria who was found not guilty of murder on the grounds of insanity, sought to have his custodial supervision order varied pursuant to the Crimes (Mental Impairment and Unfitness to be Tried) Act 1997 (‘the Act’) so that he could be transferred from Port Phillip prison to a forensic psychiatric facility.  Mr Percy asked Coghlan J, in making his decision, to have regard to the Charter of Human Rights and interpret the Act in a way that is compatible with human rights.

Salford City Council v Mullen [2010] EWCA Civ 336 (30 March 2010)In this case, the England and Wales Court of Appeal considered the impact of House of Lords decisions on the rights of tenants occupying premises under ‘introductory’ or ‘homeless’ accommodation legislation.  In considering the ability of tenants to raise arguments under art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, the Court of Appeal clarified the scope of the ‘gateway b’ defence.  

MAK and RK v United Kingdom [2010] ECHR 363 (23 March 2010)The European Court of Human Rights has held that restrictive hospital visiting conditions imposed on a father, the first applicant, suspected of abusing his daughter, the second applicant, breached the right to private and family life under art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.  Conducting a blood test and taking photographs of the child without first obtaining parental consent were also considered a violation of art 8.

Krumpholz v Austria [2010] ECHR 341 (18 March 2010)In Krumpholz v Austria, the European Court of Human Rights held that deeming the owner of a vehicle to have committed a traffic offence (by virtue of their ownership of the vehicle) breaches the European Convention right to a fair hearing and presumption of innocence.

R v Momcilovic [2010] VSCA 50 (17 March 2010) In a landmark decision, the Victorian Court of Appeal has unanimously held that:s 32(1) of the Charter is not a ‘special’ rule of statutory interpretation, but rather a statutory directive that requires all persons engaged in the task of statutory interpretation to ‘explore all possible interpretations of the provision(s) in question, and adopt that interpretation which least infringes Charter rights’;the issue of ‘justification’ pursuant to s 7(2) arises only if it is not ‘possible’ to interpret legislation compatibly with human rights;any infringement of human rights should be ‘demonstrably justified’ by clear, cogent and persuasive evidence;where an infringement can not be demonstrably justified, the Court should grant a Declaration of Inconsistent Interpretation, such declarations being ‘central’ to and ‘exemplifying the dialogue model of human rights legislation’.

Catholic Care (Diocese of Leeds) v Charity Commission for England and Wales & Anor [2010] EWHC 520 (Ch) (17 March 2010)The England and Wales High Court has held that it is for the Charity Commission to determine whether discrimination against same-sex couples by a charitable organisation is justified.