Source: http://echr.ketse.com/doc/3455.05-en-20090219/
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 21:04:11
Document Index: 33813181

Matched Legal Cases: ['Art. 5', 'Art. 3', 'Art. 13', 'Art. 5', 'Art. 5', 'Art. 5', 'Art. 5', 'Art. 5', 'Art. 5', 'art 4', '§ 66', '§ 153', '§ 68', '§ 93', '§ 68', '§ 37', '§ 57', '§ 43', '§ 48', '§ 67', '§ 70', '§ 50', '§ 46', '§ 45', '§ 46', '§ 39', '§ 74', '§ 79', '§ 191', '§ 85', '§ 51', '§ 95', '§ 97', '§ 111', '§ 31', '§ 92', '§ 29', '§ 13', '§ 40', '§ 40', '§ 58', '§ 47', '§ 119', '§ 157', '§ 31', '§ 137', '§ 47', '§ 43', '§ 67', '§ 58', '§ 107', '§ 61', '§ 57', '§ 125', '§ 127', '§ 103', 'art 4', 'Art. 13', 'Art. 15', 'Art. 15', 'Art. 15', 'Art. 15', 'Art. 3', 'Art. 3', 'Art. 41', 'Art. 5', 'Art. 5', 'Art. 5', 'Art. 5', 'Art. 5', 'art. 3', 'art. 5', 'art. 5', 'art. 5']

A. AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM / ECHR
A. AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM View
AppNr 3455/05
Articles 13; 15; 3; 41; 5; 5-1; 5-1-f; 5-4; 5-5
Violated / NonViolated 5-15-45-535-15-413
Citations 235-15-1-f5-25-35-45-56-16-3-c8912131434P1-3P7-1P12-135-1-f66-16-381314
Preliminary objection rejected (Government not precluded from raising defence under Art. 5-1-f or claiming that the derogation under Article 15 was invalid)
Application Number 3455/05
Represented by BIRNBERG PIERCE AND PARTNERS
Date of Judgment 19/02/2009
Conclusion No violation of Art. 3 ; No violation of Art. 13+3 ; Preliminary objection rejected (Government not precluded from raising defence under Art. 5-1-f or claiming that the derogation under Article 15 was invalid) ; No violation of Art. 5-1 ; Violation of Art. 5-1 ; Violation of Art. 5-4 ; No violation of Art. 5-4 ; Violation of Art. 5-5 ; Remainder inadmissible ; Pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage - award
Articles 3 ; 5 ; 5-1 ; 5-1-f ; 5-4 ; 5-5 ; 13 ; 15 ; 41
Law at Issue Section 3 (5) of the Immigration Act 1971 ; Sections 1, 3 and 62 of the Terrorism Act 2000 ; Part 4 of the 2001 Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act ; Section 4 of the 1998 Human Rights Act ; the Terrorism Act 2006
Strasbourg Case Law Aerts v. Belgium, 30 July 1998, Reports 1998-V, § 66 ; Affaire grecque (1969), § 153, Yearbook 12, vol. I ; Aksoy v. Turkey, 18 December 1996, §§ 68 and 71-84, Reports des arrêts and décisions 1996-VI ; Al-Nashif v. Bulgaria, no. 50963/99, 20 June 2006, §§ 93-97 and 137 ; Assanidze v. Georgia [GC], no. 71503/01, ECHR 2004-II ; Becciev v. Moldova, no. 9190/03, §§ 68-72 and 72-76, 4 October 2005 ; Botmeh and Alami v. the United Kingdom, no. 15187/03, 7 June 2007, § 37 ; Bouamar v. Belgium, 29 February 1988, §§ 57 and 60, Series A no. 129 ; ; Brannigan and McBride v. the United Kingdom, 26 May 1993, § 43 and §§ 48-66, Series A no. 258 ; Brogan and Others v. the United Kingdom, 29 November 1988, § 67, Series A no. 145-B ; Doorson v. the Netherlands, 26 March 1996, Reports des arrêts and décisions 1996-II, § 70 ; E. v. Norway, 29 August 1990, § 50, Series A no. 181 ; Edwards and Lewis v. the United Kingdom [GC], nos. 39647/98 and 40461/98, §§ 46-48, ECHR 2004-X ; Engel and Others v. the Netherlands, 8 June 1976, Series A no. 22 ; Fodale v. Italy, no. 70148/01, 1 June 2006 ; Fox, Campbell and Hartley v. the United Kingdom, 30 August 1990, § 45 and § 46, Series A no. 182 ; Garcia Alva v. Germany, no. 23541/94, § 39, 13 February 2001 ; Gebremedhin [Gaberamadhien] v. France, no. 25389/05, § 74, 26 April 2007 ; Hurtado v. Switzerland, 28 January 1994, opinion of the Commission, § 79, Series A no. 280-A ; Ireland v. the United Kingdom, 18 January 1978, §§ 191, 194-196, 200, 205, 207 and 212-213, Series A no. 25 ; James and Others v. the United Kingdom, 21 February 1986, § 85, Series A no. 98 ; Jasper v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 27052/95, §§ 51-53, ECHR 2000-II ; Kafkaris v. Cyprus [GC], no. 21906/04, § 95 and §§ 97-98, ECHR 2008 ; Keenan v. the United Kingdom, no. 27229/95, § 111, ECHR 2001-III ; Kolompar v. Belgium, 24 September 1992, §§ 31-32, Series A no. 235-C ; Kudla v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, §§ 92-94, ECHR 2000-XI ; Lamy v. Belgium, 30 March 1989, § 29, Series A no. 151 ; Lawless v. Ireland (no. 3), 1er July 1961, §§ 13 and 14, Series A no. 3 ; Lucà v. Italy, no. 33354/96, § 40, ECHR 2001-II ; Marshall v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 41571/98, 10 July 2001 ; Mouisel v. France, no. 67263/01, § 40, ECHR 2002-IX ; Nikolova v. Bulgaria [GC], no. 31195/96, § 58, ECHR 1999-II ; Perks and Others v. the United Kingdom, nos. 25277/94, 25279/94, 25280/94, 25282/94, 25285/94, 28048/95, 28192/95 and 28456/95, 12 October 1999 ; Pine Valley Developments Ltd and Others v. Ireland, 29 November 1991, § 47, Series A no. 222 ; Ramirez Sanchez v. France [GC], no. 59450/00, § 119 and § 157, ECHR 2006-IX ; Reinprecht v. Austria, no. 67175/01, § 31, ECHR 2005-XII ; Roche v. the United Kingdom [GC], no. 32555/96, § 137, ECHR 2005-X ; S.N. v. Sweden, no. 34209/96, § 47, ECHR 2002-V ; Saadi v. Italy [GC], no. 37201/06, §§ 43, 125 and 127, ECHR 2008 ; Tsirlis and Kouloumpas v. Greece, judgment of 29 May 1995, Reports 1997-III ; Turcan and Turcan v. Moldova, no. 39835/05, §§ 67-70, 23 October 2007 ; Van Mechelen and Others v. the Netherlands, 23 April 1997, Reports 1997-III, § 58 ; Vilvarajah and Others v. the United Kingdom, 30 October 1991, § 107.2 ; Weeks v. the United Kingdom, 2 March 1987, § 61, Series A no. 114 ; Winterwerp v. the Netherlands, 24 October 1979, § 57, Series A no. 33 ; Wloch v. Poland, no. 27785/95, § 125 and § 127, ECHR 2000-XI ; Z. and Others v. the United Kingdom, no. 29392/95, § 103, ECHR 2001-V
External Sources Newton Committee’s Report 2003 ; Second Report of the Session 2001-2002 and Sixth Report of the Session 2003-2004 of the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Human Rights; the CPT report 2004 ; Opinion on certain aspects of the United Kingdom’s derogation from Article 5 of the Convention and Part 4 of the 2001 Act of the European Commissioner for Human Rights published in August 2002 ; Concluding Observations of the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination on the United Kingdom of 10 December 2003 ; Resolution 1271 (2002) of the Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly ; “Guidelines on human rights and the fight against terrorism” adopted by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe (CM/AS(2001) Rec 1534) ; ECRI’s General Policy Recommendations of 8 June 2004 ; Article 4(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ; United Nations Human Rights Committee, in “General Comment No 29 on Article 4 of the ICCPR
Keywords "(Art. 13) EFFECTIVE REMEDY" "(Art. 15-1) DEROGATION" "(Art. 15-1) EXTENT STRICTLY REQUIRED BY SITUATION" "(Art. 15-1) PUBLIC EMERGENCY" "(Art. 15-1) THREAT TO THE LIFE OF THE NATION" "(Art. 3) DEGRADING TREATMENT" "(Art. 3) INHUMAN TREATMENT" "(Art. 41) JUST SATISFACTION" "(Art. 5-1) LAWFUL ARREST OR DETENTION" "(Art. 5-1-f) EXPULSION" "(Art. 5-4) PROCEDURAL GUARANTEES OF REVIEW" "(Art. 5-4) REVIEW OF LAWFULNESS OF DETENTION" "(Art. 5-5) COMPENSATION" "MARGIN OF APPRECIATION" PROPORTIONALITY
BOTMEH AND ALAMI v. THE UNITED KINGDOM
FODALE v. ITALY
6-1, 6-3-c, 5-1 Court (Third Section) Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction)
5-1, 5-4 Court (Chamber) Judgment (Merits)
7 (art. 3) expulsion
6 (art. 5-1-f) expulsion
5 (art. 5-4) take proceedings
3 (art. 5-1) deprivation of liberty
18 5-1
4 46-2
19 Remainder inadmissible
4 Preliminary objection joined to merits and dismissed (victim)
YOH-EKALE MWANJE v. BELGIUM
3, 13, 5-1-f Court (Second Section) Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction)
BAH v. THE UNITED KINGDOM