Helen Wildbore
European Human Rights Law Review E.H.R.L.R. (2010) No.1 Pages 59-72
Outlines the main findings and recommendations of the Human Rights Inquiry undertaken by the Equality and Human RightsCommission into the role of the Human Rights Act 1998 and how to develop the current human rights framework. Examines: (1) the impact of legal cases; (2) the impact of the Human Rights …
Latest Entries
The Equality And Human Rights Commission’s Human Rights Inquiry: An Opportunity for Change
February 22, 2010 | No CommentsPaul Mcinnes V HM Advocate (2010)
February 22, 2010 | No Comments[2010] UKSC 7
Although the Crown’s failure to disclose to an accused material which might have materially weakened its case, or materially strengthened the accused’s case, had been incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 art.6, that did not mean that the trial had been unfair. An appeal court would find that a trial had been unfair only if …
Humphreys v Revenue & Customs Commissioners (2010)
February 22, 2010 | No Comments[2010] EWCA Civ 56
Although the system of single payment of child tax credit to the person mainly responsible for the child indirectly discriminated against men it was justified as a proportionate means of pursuing a legitimate aim of social policy.
Full report can be found here
R (on the Application of Gomes) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (2010)
February 22, 2010 | No Comments[2010] EWHC 168 (Admin)
The Secretary of State for the Home Department was entitled to rely on an assurance given by the authorities of Trinidad and Tobago that an individual, whose extradition had been ordered, would immediately be held in a prison that complied with his rights under the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 art.3 so that the secretary of …
R (on the Application of Michael Degainis) v Secretary of State for Justice (2010)
February 22, 2010 | No Comments[2010] EWHC 137 (Admin)
The secretary of state’s apology and admission that he had breached the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 art.5(4) by having failed promptly to secure a review of a prisoner’s release, was a sufficient remedy to the prisoner where the breach had not extended the period he would have to spend in custody, and had not caused …
Subscribe RSS
Comment RSS
