Jordan (Teresa) v The Police Service of Northern Ireland
| Jurisdiction | Northern Ireland |
| Judge | Morgan LCJ,Girvan LJ,Gillen LJ |
| Judgment Date | 15 November 2019 |
| Neutral Citation | [2019] NICA 61 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Northern Ireland) |
| Date | 15 November 2019 |
1
IN HER MAJESTY’S COURT OF APPEAL IN NORTHERN IRELAND
_________
TERESA JORDAN
Applicant/Respondent;
-v-
THE POLICE SERVICE OF NORTHERN IRELAND
Respondent/Appellant.
_________
Before: Morgan LCJ, Girvan LJ and Gillen LJ
_________
MORGAN LCJ (delivering the judgment of the court)
[1] This is an appeal by the Police Service of Northern Ireland (“PSNI”) from an
award of damages made by Stephens J in the sum of £7500 against it as a result of his
finding that the PSNI delayed the progress of the Pearse Jordan inquest in breach of
Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights and contrary to section 6 of
the Human Rights Act 1998 (“HRA”). Dr McGleenan QC and Mr Wolfe QC
appeared for the PSNI and Miss Quinlivan QC and Miss Doherty QC for Ms Jordan.
We are grateful to all counsel for their helpful oral and written submissions.
Background
[2] The background to this appeal has been helpfully set out in a judgment of the
Supreme Court given on 6 March 2019. The respondent’s son, Pearse Jordan, was
shot and killed by a member of the Royal Ulster Constabulary on 25 November 1992.
In 1994 the respondent’s husband, Hugh Jordan, made an application to the
European Court of Human Rights (“ECtHR”), complaining that the failure to carry
out a prompt and effective investigation into his son’s death was a violation of
Article 2. An inquest commenced on 4 January 1995 but was adjourned shortly
afterwards. On 4 May 2001 the ECtHR upheld Mr Jordan’s complaint and awarded
him £10,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage, together with costs and expenses:
Jordan v United Kingdom (2003) 37 EHRR 2.
[3] A fresh inquest into Pearse Jordan’s death commenced on 24 September 2012,
and a verdict was delivered on 26 October 2012. Hugh Jordan then brought
proceedings for judicial review of the conduct of the inquest, which resulted in the
Neutral Citation No: [2019] NICA 61
Judgment: approved by the Court for handing down
(subject to editorial corrections)*
Ref: MOR11107
Delivered: 15 /11/2019
To continue reading
Request your trial
7 cases
-
Mahmud's (Omar) Application
...and Sturnham) v Parole Board ([2013] UKSC 23) [2013] 2 AC 254 §28, and applied by the Court of Appeal in this jurisdiction in Jordan [2019] NICA 61 §19: “First, the 1998 Act is not a tort statute. Its objects are different and broader. Even in a case where a finding of violation is not judg......
-
Cox's (Lorraine) Application
...principles which the Court 47 has to apply in determining this issue are largely agreed by the parties. The Court of Appeal in Jordan [2019] NICA 61 summarised the legal position as follows: “[19] The application of the principles on the award of damages for breach of Convention rights was ......
-
JR123's Application
...compensation under Article 41 of the Convention.” [9] The legal principles to be applied were summarised by the Court of Appeal in Jordan [2019] NICA 61 as follows: “[19] The application of the principles on the award of damages for breach of Convention rights was considered by the House of......
-
Department of Justice and JR123
...of State for Justice [2013] UKSC 23. This decision and that in Greenfield, as the judge noted, were considered by this court in Re Jordan [2019] NICA 61. The judge considered an array of ECtHR decisions. He essentially considered these to be fact specific and context sensitive cases, distin......
Request a trial to view additional results