Right to Liberty and Security in UK Law
-
P (by his litigation friend the Official Solicitor) v Cheshire West and Chester Council and another
“
The second question, therefore, is what is the essential character of a deprivation of liberty? It is common ground that three components can be derived from Storck, paras 74 and 89, confirmed in Stanev, paras 117 and 120, as follows: (a) the objective component of confinement in a particular restricted place for a not negligible length of time; (b) the subjective component of lack of valid consent; and (c) the attribution of responsibility to the state.
If it would be a deprivation of my liberty to be obliged to live in a particular place, subject to constant monitoring and control, only allowed out with close supervision, and unable to move away without permission even if such an opportunity became available, then it must also be a deprivation of the liberty of a disabled person. The fact that my living arrangements are comfortable, and indeed make my life as enjoyable as it could possibly be, should make no difference.
-
R (Benson) v Secretary of State for Justice
“
One can perhaps justify that by saying that it is simply the means whereby the sentence of the court is to be served. That may well be a way of justifying the distinction to be drawn between it and the situation where there has to be a release on licence and the licence cannot and does not contain such severe measures as are appropriate in release under section 246.
-
R v Deputy Governor of Parkhurst Prison and Others, ex parte Hague ; Weldon v Home Office
“
The tort of false imprisonment has two ingredients: the fact of imprisonment and the absence of lawful authority to justify it. Thus if A imposes on B a restraint within defined bounds and is sued by B for false imprisonment, the action will succeed or fail according to whether or not A can justify the restraint imposed on B as lawful. A child may be lawfully restrained within defined bounds by his parents or by the schoolmaster to whom the parents have delegated their authority.
-
Re K (A Child) (Secure Accommodation Order: Right to Liberty)
“
This analysis emphasises that plainly not all restrictions placed on the liberty of children constitute deprivation. Obviously parents have a right and a responsibility to restrict the liberty of their children, not only for protective and corrective purposes, but also sometimes for a punitive purpose. So acting they only risk breaching a child's Article 5(1) rights if they exceed reasonable bounds. Equally parents may delegate that right and responsibility to others.
-
R (Secretary of State for the Home Department) v Mental Health Review Tribunal
“
There is little dispute about the principles established in the Strasbourg jurisprudence as applicable to the interpretation of Article 5(1). First, a basic distinction is to be drawn between mere restrictions on liberty of movement and the deprivation of liberty. The former are governed by Article 2 of Protocol no. 4 and do not amount to a breach of Article 5.
-
Rk (by her litigation friend the Official Solicitor) v (1) BCC (2) YB and Another
“
However restrictions so imposed must not in their totality amount to deprivation of liberty. Deprivation of liberty engages the Article 5 rights of the child and a parent may not lawfully detain or authorise the deprivation of liberty of a child.
- Enforced Disappearances and the Application of International Humanitarian Law to the Conflict in the Southern Border Provinces of Thailand
-
Case Comment: The Legality of ‘Kettling’ after Austin
This case comment considers the European Court of Human Rights decision of Austin v United Kingdom (2012) 55 EHRR 14. Austin claimed, unsuccessfully, that police kettling at a public protest in Lon...
-
Psychiatric injustice? The therapeutic presumption of behaviour management in mental health law
There are a great many people with mental health problems receiving treatments that are aimed primarily at managing aggressive or challenging behaviours by means of sedation, seclusion or restraint...
- Control and restraint
-
Human Rights In Everyday Life
......treatment. Article 5: the right to liberty and security. Article 8: right to a private and family life. Article 14: ......
-
Reform To Adults With Incapacity Legislation Consultation
...... the 2000 Act may not be compliant with the right to liberty and security under Article 5 of the ......
-
New Deprivation Of Liberty Safeguards Introduced
......Article 5 of the European Convention of Human Rights provides. that "Everyone has the right to liberty and security. of person" ......
-
The European Court of Human Rights Overturns the House of Lords Decision on Bournewood
......, in violation of Article 5(1) of the Human Rights Act (right to liberty and security), and that the procedures available to him for a review of ......