Varnas v Luthania, [2013] ECHR, Application no 42615/06 (9 July 2013)
The European Court of Human Rights held that Lithuanian laws concerning the rights of persons on remand to receive conjugal visits were discriminatory when compared to the same right of convicted persons serving a custodial sentence. The Court therefore found a violation of article 14 (prohibition on discrimination), in conjunction with article 8 (right to family life), of the European Convention of Human Rights.
Read MoreVinter v United Kingdom [2013] ECHR, Applications nos. 66069/09, 130/10 and 3896/10 (9 July 2013)
The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights has held that the imposition of an irreducible sentence of life imprisonment breaches article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Read MoreIn 2013, the European Court of Human Rights held that it is a violation of human dignity to deny life prisoners any prospect of release or review of their sentence.
Read MoreB v Waitemata District Health Board [2013] NZHC 1702 (8 July 2013)
Three applicants challenged a Waitemata District Health Board policy to prohibit smoking in its hospitals and surrounding grounds (Policy). The applicants argued that the Policy was inconsistent with the Board’s controlling legislation and the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (Bill of Rights).
The New Zealand High Court dismissed the applicants’ claims, finding that the Board was lawfully exercising its powers consistent with its statutory framework. His Honour Justice Asher found no rights were limited by the Policy; however, he concluded that even if there were, these limitations would be justified in accordance with the Bill of Rights.
Read MoreAnchugov and Gladkov v Russia [2013] ECHR, Application Nos 11157/04 and 15162/05 (4 July 2013)
The European Court of Human Rights unanimously held that the Russian Federation’s laws denying prisoners the right to vote violated article 3 of Protocol 1 (right to free elections) of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Read MoreUnited States v Windsor, No. 12-307 (US Supreme Court, 26 June 2013
The Supreme Court of the United States has found the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which defined “marriage” and “spouse” as excluding same-sex partners, unconstitutional. The Court held DOMA to be a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons, which is protected by the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Read MoreMaloney v The Queen [2013] HCA 28 (19 June 2013)
The High Court has provided insight into the scope and operation of “special measures” under the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth) (RDA), holding that laws and regulations restricting the possession of alcohol on Palm Island were for the benefit of Aboriginal peoples. Contrary to statements of leading UN bodies such as the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (UN Committee) and the UN Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the Court has found that special measures do not require either consultation with or the informed consent of an affected community.
Read MoreBank Mellat v Her Majesty's Treasury (No 1) [2013] UKSC 38 (19 June 2013)
A narrow majority of the UK Supreme Court has ruled that it is entitled to consider "closed materials", being materials only available to one party to a proceeding, in certain cases arising under the Counter-Terrorism Act 2008 (Act). The court, in coming to its decision, sought to balance the principles of open justice and a person's right to a fair trial with considerations of national security.
Read MoreSmith v The Ministry of Defence [2013] UKSC 41 (19 June 2013)
The UK Supreme Court has held that British servicemen who died during service in Iraq were within the jurisdiction of the UK for the purposes of article 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Claims that the UK breached article 2 of the Convention by failing to implement a framework for protecting the lives of those servicemen were therefore not struck out by the Court. The Court, instead, required further facts to be examined and saved a determination on the issue for a later date.
Read MoreR v Kokopenace, 2013 ONCA 389 (14 June 2013) (Ontario Court of Appeal)
The Ontario Court of Appeal has held that the government of Ontario's failure to take adequate steps to promote the inclusion of Aboriginal on-reserve residents in a pool of potential jurors amounted to a violation of the right to a representative jury owed to a defendant in a criminal trial, a right protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Read MoreState of NSW v Kable [2013] HCA 26 (5 June 2013)
The High Court has found that the State had detained Mr Kable with lawful authority, notwithstanding that the source of that lawful authority was subsequently struck down on constitutional grounds. As a result Mr Kable had no remedy in tort for unlawful detention, despite his detention subsequently being held to be unlawful.
Read MoreZZ v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EUECJ C-300/11 (04 June 2013)
The Court of Justice of the European Communities (EU Court of Justice) has held that a person refused entry to an EU state on security grounds has a fundamental right to receive reasons for the decision. Notwithstanding security considerations, EU states have a core minimum obligation to provide enough information to enable the affected person to understand the basis of the decision and prepare a defence.
Read MoreCommissioner for Social Housing in the ACT & Massey (Residential Tenancies) [2013] ACAT 41 (4 June 2013)
The ACT Civil and Administrative Tribunal (ACAT) has held that, when determining an application for termination of a public housing tenancy, ACAT’s jurisdiction to consider the human rights compliance of the public landlord is limited to ACAT’s exercise of discretion under the Residential Tenancies Act 1997 (ACT) (RT Act).
Read MoreNorrie v NSW Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages [2013] NSWCA 145 (31 May 2013)
The NSW Court of Appeal has recognised that “sex” can mean more than male and female, allowing for the legal recognition of individuals who identify as neither. Asked to interpret the word “sex” in the Births, Deaths and Marriages Registration Act 1995 (NSW), the Court overturned a decision of the Administrative Decisions Tribunal Appeals Panel ruling that, contrary to the Appeals Panel decision, it was open to the Registrar to register as person’s sex as “non-specific”.
Read MoreMayelane v Ngwenyama (CCT 57/12) [2013] ZACC 14 (30 May 2013)
The Constitutional Court of South Africa has ruled that, in polygynous marriages (polygamy in which a man has more than one wife) under customary law, the first wife’s permission must be obtained before a second marriage can be entered into. The court drew on the Constitutional requirement that customary law be developed in line with Constitutional principles. As failure to obtain the first wife’s consent would breach the Constitutional principles of equality and inherent dignity of the person, such a requirement could legitimately be imposed upon customary law in South Africa.
Read MoreEremia v Republic of Moldova [2013] ECHR, Application no. 3564/11 (28 May 2013)
The Republic of Moldova’s failure to adequately protect a woman and her two daughters from her husband’s violent attacks amounted to a breach of the European Convention on Human Rights. The European Court of Human Rights found Moldova’s inaction amounted to a violation of articles 3 (Torture and inhuman treatment), 8 (Private Life) and 14 (Discrimination).
The case is an important development in the ways in which human rights can be used to tackle systemic issues of gender-based violence and gender discrimination.
Read MoreZZ v Secretary, Department of Justice [2013] VSC 267 (22 May 2013)
The Victorian Supreme Court has upheld the appeals of a man who was refused an assessment notice and an accreditation that he needed to work as a bus driver. The court found that in assessing whether the man was “a risk” to children, rather than an “unjustifiable risk”, the VCAT had misapplied the statutory test. Justice Bell also found that VCAT failed to consider, among other things, the relevance of the applicant’s right to work in weighing up whether it was in the public interest for him to be given the required clearances.
Read MoreMokbel v The Queen [2013] VSCA 118 (17 May 2013)
The Victorian Court of Appeal has refused Antonios Sajih (Tony) Mokbel leave to appeal against a conviction and sentence relating to three serious drug offences. The Court upheld the decision at first instance that complaints about the conduct of Australian authorities (who accepted Mr Mokbel’s extradition whilst he had an application to the European Court of Human Rights on foot) fell far short of justifying a permanent stay of his criminal charges.
Read MoreGross v Switzerland [2013] ECHR, Application no. 67810/10 (14 May 2013)
The European Court of Human Rights has held that Switzerland’s failure to provide clear guidelines as to when assisted suicide is permitted breached the right to respect for private life under article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Court declined to comment as to whether Switzerland breached article 8 by failing to assist a person, who wished to die but was not suffering from a terminal illness, to end her life.
Read MoreDirector of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Keating [2013] HCA 20 (8 May 2013)
The High Court of Australia has provided much needed clarity on the question of when an omission to do an act can constitute an element of the Commonwealth offence of obtaining a financial advantage.
Read MoreShindler v United Kingdom [2013] ECHR, Application no. 19840/09 (7 May 2013)
The European Court of Human Rights has considered whether the United Kingdom's law denying voting rights to those non-resident citizens living overseas for 15 years or more is a contravention of article 3 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The Court found that the UK laws denying voting rights to persons living abroad for more than 15 years fell within the margin of appreciation afforded to States and did not violate the article 3 right to free elections.
Read MoreFinley v The Queen, 2013 SKCA 47 (2 May 2013) (Saskatchewan Court of Appeal)
The Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan in Canada has held that the government did not contravene the right to privacy protected under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms by requesting personal information from individuals through Census questions. A person is compelled to complete the Census, even though they are required to divulge personal information over which they could claim the right to privacy in other, non-regulatory settings.
Read MoreR v Chaouk [2013] VSCA 99 (2 May 2013)
The Victorian Court of Appeal has unanimously confirmed that a court can stay a criminal trial where the absence of an instructing solicitor on a day to day basis throughout the trial is likely to result in an unfair trial. The decision upholds the first instance finding by Justice Lasry in R v Chaouk [2013] VSC 48 (15 February 2013).
Read MoreThe Queen on the Application of HC (a child, by his litigation friend CC) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department and Others [2013] EWHC 982 (Admin) (25 April 2013)
In the United Kingdom, 17 year olds apprehended by police are treated as adults. The High Court of Justice has held that to treat 17 year olds as adults offends the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which informs the UK’s obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act 1998 (UK). Accordingly, the UK must adapt its existing practices so that 17 year olds are treated as children. The law should promote the child’s best interests and provide special protections appropriate to their age.
Read MoreNyusti and Takács v Hungary, Un Doc CRPD/C/9/D/1/2010 (23 April 2013)
The UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (Committee) held that member states must establish minimum standards to ensure accessibility to banking services for people with disabilities in order to comply with their obligation to avoid discrimination on the basis of disability.
Read MoreRe Beth [2013] VSC 189 (23 April 2013)
The Supreme Court of Victoria has held that a Court’s exercise of parens patriae jurisdiction can allow it to grant orders substantially restricting the liberty of a child where such orders are in a child’s best interests and necessary for the child’s ongoing care and protection. The Court further held that neither the statutes in issue nor the Victorian Human Rights Charter operate to exclude the exercise of parens patriae jurisdiction.
Read MoreAnimal Defenders International v The United Kingdom, [2013] ECHR (Application no. 48876/08) (22 April 2013)
The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights held, by a majority of nine to eight, that the long-standing ban on paid political advertising on television and radio in the United Kingdom does not contravene the right to freedom of expression in article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Read MoreEsther Kiobel, Individually and on behalf of her late husband Dr. Barinem Kiobel, et al, Petitioners. v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. et al., 569 US (2013) (17 April 2013)
The United States Supreme Court has found that the Alien Tort Statute, used for decades by survivors of human rights abuses to seek redress, has no application to violations committed in other countries unless there is a strong connection with the US. The Court expanded the presumption against extraterritorial application to limit the scope of the Statute. The Justices of the Court agreed that mere presence of a corporation in the US would not of itself demonstrate a strong enough link to bring alleged extraterritorial human rights violations within the Statute’s ambit. However, the Court declined to address the broader question of corporate liability under the Alien Tort Statute.
Read MoreAswat v The United Kingdom, ECHR 2013 (Application no. 17299/12) (16 April 2013)
The European Court of Human Rights has unanimously held that the extradition of the applicant from the UK to the US would violate article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights because of the severity of the applicant's mental illness.
Read MoreBare v Small [2013] VSC 129 (Unreported, 25 March 2013)
The Supreme Court of Victoria dismissed an application seeking judicial review of two decisions by the Office of Police Integrity not to investigate a complaint of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment by an officer of Victoria Police.
Read MoreCore Issues Trust v Transport for London [2013] EWHC 651 (Admin) (22 March 2013)
The English High Court of Justice held that Transport for London's decision to prevent the Core Issues Trust from advertising a confrontational message against lesbians, gay men, bisexual and transgender individuals on London's bus network did not contravene Transport for London's duty to act compatibly with the European Convention on Human Rights.
Read MoreCatt v ACPO and Ors; T v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis and Anor [2013] EWCA Civ 192 (14 March 2013)
The English Court of Appeal upheld two appeals from the Divisional Court regarding the right to respect to private life under article 8(1) of the European Convention of Human Rights and the retention of information by the police. The Court found that, even in cases where the collection of information did not breach the right to privacy or the information was publicly available, systematic collation and retention of such information may amount to an unjustifiable infringement of the right to privacy.
Read MoreSalakhov and Islyamova v Ukraine [2013] ECHR, Application No. 28005/08
The European Court of Human Rights has reaffirmed the principle of international human rights law that prisoners should not be subjected to hardship or constraint other than that which necessarily results from their deprivation of liberty. Prisoners must be treated with humanity and dignity, and their detention should not prevent them from accessing health care in conditions comparable to those enjoyed by patients in the outside community.
Read MoreEon v France, ECHR 2013 (Application No. 26118/10)
The European Court of Human Rights has upheld a French activist’s appeal against a fine for offending the French President when he held a placard with the French equivalent of “get lost, you prick” while the President was at a public event.
Read MoreVictoria Police Toll Enforcement v Taha; State of Victoria v Brookes [2013] VSCA 37
The Court of Appeal held that there is a duty on Magistrates to inquire into whether infringement offenders have disabilities such as mental illness or intellectual disability, or other special circumstances, before making an imprisonment order in respect of unpaid fines. This duty is a consequence of a proper construction of the relevant statutory provision, section 160 of the Infringements Act 2006 Vic. This construction is supported by section 32 of the Charter, as it is more compatible with the rights to equality, liberty and a fair hearing.
Read MoreMonis v The Queen; Droudis v The Queen [2013] HCA 4 (27 February 2013)
The High Court of Australia has split 3:3 on whether a provision of the Criminal Code (Cth) making it an offence for a person to use a postal or similar service in an offensive way is invalid as an impermissible burden on the freedom of communication about government or political matters implied in the Australian Constitution (“implied freedom”). French CJ, Hayne and Heydon JJ separately answered the question in the affirmative, while Crennan, Kiefel and Bell JJ jointly answered in the negative. Pursuant to section 23(2)(a) of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth), which deals with equally divided opinions of the Court, the decision appealed from — that of the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal that the provision is valid — was affirmed.
Read MoreAttorney-General for South Australia v Corporation of the City of Adelaide and Ors [2013] HCA 3
This High Court decision concerns the scope of the implied freedom of political communication under the Australian Constitution. Specifically, it considered the second part of the test from Lange v Australian Broadcasting Corporation 189 CLR 520 – whether a by-law was reasonably appropriate and adapted to serve a legitimate end in a manner compatible with the maintenance of representative democracy as the constitutionally prescribed system of government.
Read MoreJ (Children) [2013] UKSC 9
The United Kingdom Supreme Court has considered the appropriate balance to be struck between the right of the child to live in a safe and nurturing environment and the right to family life in circumstances where those two rights are said to be in conflict. Although these rights are most often complementary, there are unfortunate cases where a child is at risk of being harmed by a family member and protecting the child (and upholding their human rights) can necessitate an intrusion by the State into a family’s private life. In this judgment, the Court made a weighted legal analysis of when and how such an intrusion can be justified.
Read MoreX v Austria [2013] ECHR 057
The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights has found that where second-parent adoption is available for unmarried different-sex couples, the impossibility of second-parent adoption by same sex couples is discriminatory and violates articles 8 and 14 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.
Read MoreMotswagae and Others v Rustenburg Local Municipality and Another [2013] ZACC 1
The Constitutional Court of South Africa held that excavation work in close proximity to the applicants’ homes was tantamount to eviction, and that section 26(3) of the Constitution protects the undisturbed occupation of home unless there is a court order.
Read MoreFabris v France [2013] ECHR, Application no.16574/08
The European Court of Human Rights recently handed down a decision which identified a violation of article 14 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms where an individual “born of adultery” was denied the right – due to the operation of legislation in France – to inherit an equal share of his mother's estate.
Read MoreBikramjit Singh v France, UN Doc CCPR/C/106/D/1852/2008
The United Nations Human Rights Committee has found that France's restrictions on the wearing of religious symbols or clothing in state schools breached a student's right to religious freedom under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Read MoreCase of Horvath and Kiss v Hungary [2013], ECHR Application no. 11146/11
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has found that Hungary’s procedures for placing children in schools for children with mental disabilities resulted in discrimination against the Roma, curtailing their enjoyment of the right to education. This is the most recent in a series of ECHR cases addressing the segregation of Roma children within European state education systems.
Read MoreR (on the application of T) v Greater Manchester Chief Constable & Ors [2013] EWCA Civ 25 (29 January 2013)
The UK Court of Appeal recently held that disclosure of a person’s convictions or police cautions can breach their right to privacy under the European Convention on Human Rights.
Read MoreCase of Eweida and Others v The United Kingdom [2013] ECHR, Applications nos. 48420/10, 59842/10, 51671/10 and 36516/10 (15 January 2013)
In four different applications, the European Court of Human Rights considered the balance the state party had purported to strike between religious freedom and the protection against discrimination. In so doing, the Court afforded a significant “margin of appreciation” to the state party.
Read MoreKinloch (Appellant) v Her Majesty’s Advocate (Respondent) (Scotland) [2012] UKSC 62 (19 December 2012)
The UK Supreme Court held that an unauthorised police surveillance operation did not breach an individual’s right to respect for their private life under article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. This was because the surveillance occurred in public places and the subject of the surveillance had no reasonable expectation of privacy.
Read MoreEl-Masri v the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia [2012] ECHR 2067 (13 December 2012)
The European Court of Human Rights held the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia responsible for the "extraordinary rendition" of a German citizen, which involved his transfer into the custody of United States authorities, unlawful detention and ill-treatment amounting to torture.
Read MoreDudley Lee v Minister of Correctional Services [2012] ZACC 30 (11 December 2012)
The Constitutional Court of South Africa affirms that domestic law must provide an effective remedy for breach of rights contained in the South African Bill of Rights and that failure to minimise the risk of contracting a tuberculosis infection in prison breaches the right to humane conditions in detention.
Read More