Sole v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry & Ors [2007] EWHC 1527 (Admin) (30 May 2007)
This recent decision of the England and Wales High Court concerned an application for judicial review of a compulsory acquisition order (‘CPO’) made by the London Development Authority, and confirmed by the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, for the purpose of development for the London Olympics and a further development, known as The Legacy.
Read MoreJohnson v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2007] EWCA Civ 427 (9 May 2007)
The UK Court of Appeal has held that a delay in determining eligibility for parole may amount to arbitrary and unlawful detention.
Read MoreBrooker v The Police [2007] NZSC 30 (4 May 2007)
The Supreme Court of New Zealand has recently considered the extent to which privacy limits freedom of expression in the context of the Bill of Rights Act 1990 (NZ).
Read MoreBaczkowski & Ors v Poland [2007] ECHR 1543/06 (3 May 2007)
The European Court of Human Rights has found that Poland violated its obligations to protect the right to freedom of assembly as a result of a failure to facilitate and accommodate a protest regarding discrimination against minority groups.
Read MoreR v White [2007] VSC 142 (7 May 2007)
The incarceration in prison of a person with a severe psychiatric illness may amount to a violation of the Victorian Charter of Human Rights, according to Bongiorno J of the Supreme Court of Victoria.
Read MoreVilho Eskelinen & Ors v Finland [2007] ECHR [GC] 63235/00 (19 April 2007)
In a judgment handed down on 19 April 2007, the Grand Chamber of European Court of Human Rights considered the scope of the right to a fair hearing in the context of civil proceedings, with particular reference to the acceptable length of proceedings and the necessity of an oral hearing.
Read MoreVan Colle & Anor v Hertfordshire Police [2007] EWCA Civ 325 (24 April 2007)
The UK Court of Appeal has held that the right to life imposes a positive obligation on responsible authorities to take reasonable steps to safeguard the lives of those in their jurisdiction as against known and immediate risks.
Read MoreR (on the application of H) v Mental Health Review Tribunal [2007] All ER (D) 29 (Apr)
The claimant was the subject of hospital and restriction orders under the Mental Health Act 1983 (UK). The Mental Health Review Tribunal reviewed the claimant's position and subsequently ordered the claimant's discharge under s 73 of the Act on the condition that, amongst other things, the claimant 'shall comply' with medication prescribed by a specified doctor. The claimant applied for revocation of this and other conditions and sought an order for absolute discharge on the basis that it interfered with his right under art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights which provides that '[e]veryone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence'.
Read MoreMain(R) v Minister for Legal Aid [2007] EWHC 742 (2 April 2007)
The UK High Court of Justice has quashed a decision by the Minister for Legal Aid to refuse the family of two people killed in a train crash funding to be legally represented at the coroner's inquest. Central to the decision was the finding that funding was necessary to carry out an effective investigation into the accident pursuant to art 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Read MoreCopland v United Kingdom [2007] ECHR 62617/00 (3 April 2007)
The European Court of Human Rights has held that a public college which monitored an employee’s telephone, email and internet usage without her knowledge engaged in conduct amounting to an interference with her right to respect for private life and correspondence within the meaning of art 8 of the European Convention.
Read MoreKeogh v R [2007] EWCA Crim 528
The UK Court of Appeal has held that the requirement under the Human Rights Act 1998 (UK) that, so far as it is possible to do so, legislation be interpreted and applied compatibly with human rights required that legislation which, on its natural meaning imposed a burden on defendants to establish their innocence, be read in such a way as to impose this substantive obligation on the prosecution.
Read MoreAndrey Frolov v Russia [2007] ECHR 205/02 (29 March 2007)
In a series of recent cases, the European Court of Human Rights has found conditions of detention in prisons to be incompatible with the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment enshrined in art 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. A number of principles can be ascertained from the cases of Andrey Frolov v Russia (Application No 205/02, 29 March 2007), Istratii and others v Moldova (Application No 8721/05, 27 March 2007) and Todor Todorov v Bulgaria (Application No 50765/99, 5 April 2007).
Read MoreImmigration and Refugee Protection Act 2001 (Can)
On 23 February 2007, the Supreme Court of Canada overturned provisions of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act 2001 (Can) relating to the detention of permanent residents and foreign nationals on the basis that the provisions contravened the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Canadian Parliament was given one year to rewrite the IRPA in accordance with the Charter.
Read MoreR v Williams [2007] VSC 2 (15 January 2007)
The Supreme Court of Victoria has substantively considered the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities 2006 (Vic) for the first time.
Read MoreCapital Property Projects (ACT) Pty Ltd v Planning and Land Authority [2006] ACTSC 122 (15 December 2006) The ACT Supreme Court has recently considered the application of s 30(1) of the Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT), which provides that, ‘In working out the meaning of a Territory law, an interpretation that is consistent with human rights is as far as possible to be preferred.’
Read MoreHolomiov v Moldova, (Application No 30649/05), 7 November 2006 (European Court of Human Rights) The European Court of Human Rights has found a violation of art 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) of the European Convention on Human Rights on account of the authorities’ failure to provide a prisoner with medical care appropriate to his conditions.
Read MoreOn 13 November 2006, the UN Human Rights Committee further elaborated on what constitutes arbitrary detention for the purposes of art 9(1) of the ICCPR, finding that there must be ‘appropriate justification’ for continued mandatory detention in light of the circumstances of the particular case.
Read MoreHanan Al-Rawahi v Mohammad Ali Niazi [2006] ACTSC 84 (15 September 2006)
The ACT Supreme Court has recently considered the relevance of the right to a fair trial under s 21 of the Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) to the extension of time limits in civil proceedings.
Read More
TSL v Secretary to the Department of Justice [2006] VSCA (26 September 2006)
The Victorian Court of Appeal (comprising Callaway AP, Buchanan JA and Coldrey AJA) has recently made its first reference to the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities.
Read MoreColeman v Australia, HRC, Communication No 1157/2003, UN Doc CCPR/C/87/D/1157/2003 (10 August 2006)
In a decision with important ramifications for the human rights obligations of federal, state and local governments and officials, the UN Human Rights Committee (‘Committee’) has concluded that the application of a Queensland law and a Townsville bylaw impermissibly restricted the complainant’s right to freedom of expression, placing Australian breach of its obligations under the ICCPR.
Read MoreD and E v Australia, HRC, Communication No 1050/2002, UN Doc CCPR/C/87/D/1050/2002 (25 July 2006)
The UN Human Rights Committee (‘the Committee’) recently handed down its latest in a string of decisions concerning Australia’s policy of mandatory immigration detention. The authors of the complaint were two Iranian nationals who, together with their two children, arrived in Australiaby boat in November 2000. Pursuant to Australia’s policy, the four were held in immigration detention for a total of three years and two months. During their period of mandatory detention, the relevant provisions of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth) effectively precluded judicial review of the lawfulness of their detention, while their applications for asylum were rejected. The four were ultimately granted Global Special Humanitarian visas on 13 March 2006.
Read MorePerovic v CW, No CH 05/1046, ACT Children’s Court, Unreported (1 June 2006)
This case concerned the right of a child to a fair trial without unreasonable delay under the Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT). After considering jurisprudence from the European Court of Human Rights, the Magistrate held that there had been an unreasonable delay contrary to the human right enshrined in the Act and ordered a permanent stay of proceedings.
Read MoreIn March this year, the UN Human Rights Committee (‘HRC’) published a landmark finding concerning alleged breaches of articles 2(3) (right to an effective remedy), 7 (right to freedom from cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment), 10 (rights of persons deprived of their liberty) and 24 (right to adequate protection for children) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (‘ICCPR’) in a New South Wales prison.
Read More