January 2012

Bratza: criticism of Strasbourg “not borne out by the facts”

January 24, 2012

In today’s Independent, President of the European Court of Human Rights Sir Nicolas Bratza defends the record of his court, and effectively pleads for more understanding in Britain. The European Court, he says has been particularly respectful of decisions emanating from courts in the UK since the coming into effect of the Human Rights Act, [...]

Read the full piece →

Commission v Hungary

January 24, 2012

Last week the European Commission took the first step towards European Court proceedings against Hungary, over the country’s controversial new constitution, which took effect at the start of the year. Here’s the Commission’s press release. It summarises the legal grounds on which the Commission has issued its letter of formal notice: Under new Hungarian legislation, [...]

Read the full piece →

Without Prejudice

January 20, 2012

Without Prejudice will be back on the podcast air properly in a couple of weeks in its panel format, but in the meantime Charon QC and I spoke last night about the government’s justice and security green paper on “closed material procedures” in civil proceedings Abu Qatada’s case in the European Court of Human Rights [...]

Read the full piece →

Sharia, divorce and arbitration

January 19, 2012

On Monday the Guardian published this piece about Sadakat Kadri‘s claim that Islamic law can be compatible with the toughest human rights legislation. I doubt this very much; and I don’t think my or anyone else’s scepticism is the result of a lack of “sharia-literacy”. In a BBC Radio 3 interview last week with Anne [...]

Read the full piece →

Children’s Rights Alliance v Justice Secretary: campaign groups and human rights

January 17, 2012

It’s not unusual nowadays for campaign groups of all kinds to take judicial review proceedings against public authorities: it’s now well established that their knowledge of and involvement in matters of public interest means they can have a sufficient interest entitling them to challenge public law decisions within the area of their expertise. The key [...]

Read the full piece →