1COR Resources 


Human Rights & Public Law Update 
Search Resources:
Advanced search



Our privacy policy explains how we use cookies. By using this site, we have assumed your agreement to their use.



Bank Mellat v HM Treasury [2011] EWCA Civ 1

Financial restrictions imposed in 2009 on an Iranian Bank which effectively excluded it from the UK financial market did not breach common law or ECHR principles of fairness

Barclays Bank plc v Guardian News and Media Ltd [2009] EWHC 591(QB)

Public interest in the probity of financial institutions did not mean that journalists should have complete freedom to publish in full confidential documents leaked in breach of a fiduciary duty.


An activity need not have the quality of "seclusion" about it to attract the protection of Article 8, and non-natural entities may also enjoy the right to privacy

Beyeler v Italy

In cases where a deprivation of property is not an unlawful one but only the circumstances breach Article 1 Protocol 1 a restitutionary remedy is not available under Article 41


In a trade mark dispute, Section 12(3) of the Human Rights Act required that court should not grant a prior restraining order to the proprietor of a trade mark to prevent a competitor from comparative advertising unless the applicant can satisfy the court that he is likely to be granted a final injunction at trial

British Tobacco

The Tobacco Advertising and Promotion (Point of Sale) Regulations 2004 were made with the legitimate aim of deterring the public from smoking and were not a disproportionate restriction of commercial free speech under Article 10 of the Convention.

C Plc

The common law privilege against self-incrimination must be modified in the light of the Human Rights Act which protects the right of the public at large against the effects of crime

Cream Holdings

The test in s.12(3) HRA 1998, which applied on an application to restrain prior publication, was whether the applicant had established a real prospect of success at trial, rather than that success was more likely than not.

G.J. v Luxembourg

Non human entities such as companies may be "victims" of the breach of a right to trial within reasonable time

Howarth v UK

Breach of the right to a trial within reasonable time may lead to an award for non pecuniary damages for frustration suffered by the individual concerned


This case raises the question of whether shareholders may claim to be victims of Convention breaches incurred by their company


Defendants in conspiracy proceedings following from the allegations of unlawful share dealing in the Guinness/Distillers affair had suffered a denial of their privilege against self incrimination under Article 6 when compelled evidence was used against them in the criminal trial.


In ordering delivery up of documents and allowing claimants to trace anonymous sources in insider information cases, the courts still look to the Norwich Pharmacal test and the protection given by confidentiality to commercial interests.

Lutz John v Germany

Complaints that the failure of the domestic courts to seek a preliminary ruling from the European Court of Justice breached the applicant's rights under Article 6 were declared inadmissible.


The ruling against in the Saunders case on the question of the denial of the presumption of innocence did not mean that the claimant's pre Human Rights Act convictions were unsafe

O'Neil v France

A company director had not suffered a denial of his right of access to court when he was refused an order quashing a judgment ruling him liable to pay the debts of his bankrupt company.

Oao Neftyanay Kopaniya Yukos v Russia (Application no. 14902/04)

In persecuting oil giant for tax evasion the Russian authorities were not politically motivated

R (on the application of Heather Moor and Edgecomb Ltd) (Appellant) v Financial Ombudsman Service (Respondent) & Simon Lodge (Interested Party) [2008] EWCA Civ 642

The scheme for regulation of financial services by the Financial Ombudsman did not require the FOS to determine a complaint in accordance with the common law. The availability of judicial review of the decisions reached by the FOS satisfied the requirements of Article 6 of the Convention.

R (on the application of Zagorski and Baze) v Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills and Archimedes Pharma UK Ltd

EU Charter Rights do not protect US Death Row citizens

R (on the applications of (1) SRM Global Master Fund LP (2) RAB Special Situations (Master) Fund Limited (3) Dennis Grainger and others) v The Commissioners of Her Majesty’s Treasury [2009] EWCA Civ 788

The assumptions which the valuer of Northern Rock shares was required to make pursuant to the Banking (Special Provisions) Act 2008 s.5(4) did not violate the rights of shareholders to peaceful enjoyment of possessions under Article 1 Protocol 1 of the Human Rights Convention

R v Saunders and Others

Neither Article 41 or 46 of the Convention required the convictions of the defendants in the Guinness/Distillers trial to be overturned since the rulings by the Strasbourg Court in favour of the defendants did not create enforceable rights in domestic law.

Roquette Freres

Companies can claim the protection of Article 8 as a general principle under EC law

Sinclair Collis Limited, The Members of National Association of Cigarette Machine Operators (Interested Party) v Secretary of State for Health [2010] EWHC 3112 (Admin)

The Secretary of State for Health did not breach the human right to peaceful enjoyment of property or European Union law by banning the sale of tobacco products from automatic vending machines.

Sinclair Collis Ltd, R (o.t.a) v. The Secretary of State for Health [2011] EWCA Civ 437

Ban on cigarette vending machines not a breach of EU free movement law


The legal burden on a defendant to prove innocence in a trade mark infringement action did not infringe Article 6

Uldozotteinik v Hungary

Proceedings for registering a company name involved "civil rights" and therefore engaged Article 6.


A court has no jurisdiction to make declarations of incompatibility in relation to events occurring before the Human Rights Act came into force on 2nd October 2000; in any event, the Consumer Credit Act 1974 is not incompatible with either Article 6(1) ECHR or Article 1 of the First Protocol to the ECHR. Reference to Hansard will rarely be appropriate in determining questions of a statute’s compatibility with and interpretation under the ECHR under s.3 and s.4 HRA.


Copyright © 1998-2014  One Crown Office Row, Temple, London EC4Y 7HH
Web: www.1cor.com Tel: 020 7797 7500, Fax: 020 7797 7550
Information on this site is published subject to this disclaimer and privacy policy.

Website internet development system,
technical design and hosting by Enstar
Visual design by The Helm Creative