Right to Liberty and Security in UK Law

Leading Cases
  • P (by his litigation friend the Official Solicitor) v Cheshire West and Chester Council and another
    • Supreme Court
    • 19 Marzo 2014

    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.

    But, as it seems to me, what it means to be deprived of liberty must be the same for everyone, whether or not they have physical or mental disabilities. 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.

  • R v Deputy Governor of Parkhurst Prison and Others, ex parte Hague ; Weldon v Home Office
    • House of Lords
    • 24 Julio 1991

    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)
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 15 Noviembre 2000

    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.

  • Rk (by her litigation friend the Official Solicitor) v (1) BCC (2) YB and Another
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 20 Diciembre 2011

    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.

  • R (Secretary of State for the Home Department) v Mental Health Review Tribunal
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 19 Diciembre 2002

    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.

  • ID and Others v Home Office and Another
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 04 Marzo 2005

    In short, it appears to me that we are at liberty, unconstrained by binding authority, to interpret Schedule 2 to the 1971 Act without any preconceived notions. If we do so, there is nothing there to suggest that Parliament intended to confer immunity from suit on immigration officers who asked themselves the wrong questions, so that their decision to deprive an immigrant of his/her liberty was a nullity and consequently unlawful.

See all results
  • Human Rights Act 1998
    • UK Non-devolved
    • 1 de Enero de 1998
    ...... Article 5 . Right to liberty and security . Right to liberty and security. . SCH-1.1 .   . 1. ......
  • Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001
    • UK Non-devolved
    • 1 de Enero de 2001
    ......Human Rights Act 1998 (c. 42); and. . ‘subordinate legislation’ has the same ... of Europe of a derogation from Article 5 of the ECHR (right to liberty and security) to the extent necessary to ensure that the measures ......
  • Indictable Offences Act 1848
    • UK Non-devolved
    • 1 de Enero de 1848
    ...... Peace for any County, Riding, Division, Liberty, City, Borough, or Place within England . or ... other Prison, Lock-up House, or Place of Security, in the County, Riding, Division, Liberty, City, ... by Counsel or Attorney, as relates to the Right of Parties charged with Offences to have Copies ......
  • Summary Jurisdiction Act 1848
    • UK Non-devolved
    • 1 de Enero de 1848
    ...... Peace for any County, Riding, Division, Liberty, City, Borough, or Place within England . or ... other Prison, Lock-up House, or Place of Security, or to such other Custody as the said Justice or ..., as relates to the Right of Persons accused, in Cases of summary. ......
See all results
Books & Journal Articles
See all results
Law Firm Commentaries
See all results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT