Human Rights Violation in UK Law

Leading Cases
  • Alleyne and Others v Attorney General of Trinidad and Tobago
    • Privy Council
    • 21 Jan 2015

    There are no standard rules, but the fact that the injured party has suffered damage will obviously militate in favour of a monetary award. In assessing compensation in such a case, the common law measure of damages will be a useful guide, but no more than a guide (just as an award by the Strasbourg Court will not necessarily be the same as the measure of damages at common law for conduct amounting to a tort).

  • R v Secretary of State for Social Security, ex parte Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants ; R v Secretary of State for Social Security, ex parte B
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 21 Jun 1996

    After all, the 1993 Act confers on asylum seekers fuller rights than they had ever previously enjoyed, the right of appeal in particular. And yet these Regulations for some genuine asylum seekers at least must now be regarded as rendering these rights nugatory. Eitherthat, or the Regulations necessarily contemplate for some a life so destitute that to my mind no civilised nation can tolerate it.

  • R (Alconbury Developments Ltd) v Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions
    • House of Lords
    • 09 May 2001

    In the absence of some special circumstances it seems to me that the court should follow any clear and constant jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. If it does not do so there is at least a possibility that the case will go to that court which is likely in the ordinary case to follow its own constant jurisprudence.

  • Suratt and Others v Attorney General (No 2)
    • Privy Council
    • 21 Jul 2008

    But what the appellants have been deprived of here – assuming always in their favour that their section 4(b) constitutional right has been breached – is the opportunity in recent years to bring discrimination complaints against private persons.

  • R v DPP ex parte Kebeline
    • House of Lords
    • 28 Oct 1999

    In this area difficult choices may have to be made by the executive or the legislature between the rights of the individual and the needs of society. In some circumstances it will be appropriate for the courts to recognise that there is an area of judgment within which the judiciary will defer, on democratic grounds, to the considered opinion of the elected body or person whose act or decision is said to be incompatible with the Convention.

  • Sepet v SSHD
    • House of Lords
    • 20 Mar 2003

    There is compelling support for the view that refugee status should be accorded to one who has refused to undertake compulsory military service on the grounds that such service would or might require him to commit atrocities or gross human rights abuses or participate in a conflict condemned by the international community, or where refusal to serve would earn grossly excessive or disproportionate punishment: see, for example, Zolfagharkhani v Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration) [1993] FC 540; Ciric v Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration) [1994] 2 FC 65; Canas-Segovia v Immigration and Naturalization Service (1990) 902 F 2d 717; UNHCR Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status, paras 169, 171.

  • RB (Algeria) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
    • House of Lords
    • 18 Feb 2009

    If the proceedings had been an action in tort for a breach or threatened breach of article 3, they would certainly be asserting a civil right and article 6 would be engaged: compare Tomasi v France (1993) 15 EHRR 1 at paragraphs 120-122. As I have said, it is the nature of the proceedings which decides whether article 6 is engaged or not.

See all results
  • Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018
    • UK Non-devolved
    • January 01, 2018
    ...... for or be a deterrent to gross violations of human rights, or otherwise promote— . (i) ......
  • Human Rights Act 1998
    • UK Non-devolved
    • January 01, 1998
    ....... In its judgment of 29 November 1988 in the Case of Brogan and Others, the European Court of Human Rights held that there had been a violation of Article 5(3) in respect of each of the applicants, all of whom had been detained under Section 12 of the 1984 Act. The Court held that even the ......
  • The Refugee or Person in Need of International Protection (Qualification) Regulations 2006
    • UK Non-devolved
    • January 01, 2006
    ......“person eligible for humanitarian protection” means a person who is eligible for ... or repetition as to constitute a severe violation of a basic human right, in particular a right ... the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms6; or. (b)(b) an ......
  • The Sanctions (EU Exit) (Miscellaneous Amendments) (No. 2) Regulations 2020
    • UK Non-devolved
    • January 01, 2020
    ...... S-2 . Amendment of the Iran (Sanctions) (Human Rights) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 Amendment of ... commission of a serious human rights violation or abuse in Burma, . the obstruction of a ......
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