R (Weaver) v London and Quadrant Housing Trust [2008] EWHC 1377 (Admin) (24 June 2008) The UK High Court of Justice has recently considered the meaning of ‘public authority’ under the Human Rights Act 1998 (UK).  In this decision, Registered Social Landlords were held to be public authorities for the purposes of the Act.

Maslov v Austria [2008] ECHR 1638/03 (23 June 2008) The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights has held that the deportation of a youth who had spent the majority of his childhood in Austria constituted a violation of his right to respect for his family and private life.

Bobrowski v Poland [2008] ECHR 64916/01 (17 June 2008) The European Court of Human Rights has held that Poland violated its obligation to ensure a fair trial under art 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights by failing to grant legal aid to an individual in respect of civil proceedings.  However, the Court held that a denial of legal aid was justified where the applicant had hired his or her own private lawyer, notwithstanding that the lawyer proved to not be competent.

Beoku-Betts (FC) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent) [2008] UKHL 39 (25 June 2008) The House of Lords held that the right to family life should be interpreted broadly, and encompass consideration of the rights of other family members, when determining an appeal against the Secretary of State's refusal of leave to remain under s 65 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 (UK).

MM (Guardianship) [2008] VCAT 1282 (26 June 2008) VCAT has imposed a supervised treatment order on a man with an intellectual disability, requiring him to be kept in detention to ensure his compliance with a treatment plan – despite his willingness to consent to the plan – to reduce the risk that he could cause harm to others.  The Tribunal referred to, but undertook scant analysis of, the interpretative provisions of the Charter and the requirement that any limitation on a right be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.

Director of Housing v TP (Residential Tenancies) [2008] VCAT 1275 (24 June 2008) In this case, VCAT considered that the rights to privacy and family, and to protection of children and the family unit, were relevant to determining whether an application for an order of possession by the Director of Housing should be granted as against a single mother of four children.

Carwoode Pty Ltd v Cardinia SC (Red Dot) [2008] VCAT 1334 (23 June 2008) This was a case regarding an application for permits to subdivide land and construct various buildings ancillary to a freeway which would involve the removal of native vegetation to the detriment of the Growling Grass Frog.  During the hearing of the merits, a challenge was made to VCAT’s jurisdiction to hear the matter and submissions were made that VCAT had failed to abide by the principles of natural justice and the Charter.

PHS Community Services Society v Attorney-General (Canada) 2008 BCSC 661 (27 May 2008) The Supreme Court of British Columbia recently declared that laws which made safe self-injecting rooms illegal were unconstitutional and incompatible with the rights to life, liberty and security of the person in the Canadian Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms.

Capital Property Projects (ACT) Pty Ltd v ACTPLA [2008] ACTCA 9 (21 May 2008)The ACT Court of Appeal has held that the obligation under s 30 of the Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) to interpret laws compatibly with human rights may be engaged even where the words of a statute are clear and there is no ambiguity.  In particular, the Court held that a requirement that leave to appeal certain decisions only be granted where ‘substantial injustice’ would otherwise occur was potentially incompatible with the positive right to a fair trial under s 21 of the HRA.  The Court considered that it may be necessary to ‘modify’ the reference to ‘substantial injustice’ as ‘something less than a substantial injustice may well result in an unfair trial’.

Ferla v Poland [2008] ECHR 55470/00 (20 May 2008) The European Court of Human Rights has held that a Polish prisoner’s right to respect for his family life was violated by onerous visitation restrictions, which substantially prevented him from seeing his wife and son.  The applicant was awaiting a final determination on a serious assault charge.  Although his wife had previously made a statement to police about the alleged crime, the risk of prejudicing her willingness to testify at trial was considered insufficient reason for interfering with the right to family life.

R v DB [2008] SCC 25 (16 May 2008) The Supreme Court of Canada recently considered the validity of a rebuttable presumption that minors committing serious offences should be sentenced as adults.  A majority of the Court concluded that the presumption offended against the right not to be deprived of liberty otherwise than in accordance with principles of fundamental justice under s 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

In the Matter of an Adoption of D [2008] ACTSC 44 (15 May 2008)A decision of the ACT Supreme Court has considered the scope of the right to family life and protection in the context of adoption proceedings.