Search for: "Gillan v. Gillan"
Results 1 - 20
of 35
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Dec 2022, 7:00 pm
(Basu v. [read post]
4 Mar 2019, 8:31 am
In Gillan and Quinton v UK, sections 44 and 45 of the 2000 Act (which set out a power to stop and search exercisable in relation to any person anywhere in the street), had already been held not to be in accordance with the law despite having a narrower purpose and scope of application, and despite not allowing as intrusive a search as the one permitted under Schedule 7. [read post]
17 Sep 2016, 4:56 am
This was the question facing the UK Information Tribunal recently in Queen Mary University of London v (1) The Information Commissioner and (2) Alem Matthees. [read post]
11 Jul 2016, 4:46 pm
** Is the All State Nationwide Class Back for False Advertising Plaintiffs? [read post]
11 Jan 2016, 7:30 am
The Justices considered two previous judgments in which it/the House of Lords has held suspicionless stop and search powers to comply with article 8 (R (Gillan) v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2006] UKHL 12; Beghal v Director of Public Prosecutions [2015] UKSC 49) and the European Court of Human Rights’ (ECtHR) decision in Gillan v UK (2010) application no. 4158/05, in which it held that the suspicionless search power under section 44… [read post]
16 Oct 2015, 1:15 am
In summary Mrs Beghal’s argument was that: Article 8 had been breached because the powers created by Schedule 7 did not depend on any objectively justifiable grounds of suspicion so they failed the test of legality (Gillan v United Kingdom (2010) 50 EHRR 45). [read post]
6 Mar 2015, 7:18 am
Wednesday’s oral arguments in King v. [read post]
22 Jan 2015, 5:00 am
In Gelboim v. [read post]
15 Jan 2015, 3:57 am
In T-Mobile South v. [read post]
26 Nov 2014, 5:22 am
The Divisional Court (Gross LJ, Swift and Foskett JJ) began by considering the relevance of the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in Gillan v UK 50 EHRR 1105. [read post]
28 Jun 2014, 5:25 pm
Lord Wilson held that the regime for the issue of CRCs and ECRCs was sufficiently foreseeable and accessible for it to be in accordance with the law as interpreted in Gillan v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2006] UKHL 12 [2006] 2 AC 307, and Gillan v United Kingdom (2010) 50 EHRR 1105 at [31]. [read post]
26 Jun 2014, 1:32 am
Lord Wilson held that the regime for the issue of CRCs and ECRCs was sufficiently foreseeable and accessible for it to be in accordance with the law as interpreted in Gillan v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2006] UKHL 12, [2006] 2 AC 307, and Gillan v UK (App No 4158/05), (2010) 50 EHRR 1105 at [31]. [read post]
5 Dec 2013, 1:06 am
Anthony Cullen & Steven Wheatley, The Human Rights of Individuals in De Facto Regimes under the European Convention on Human Rights John Ip, The Reform of Counterterrorism Stop and Search after Gillan v United KingdomShorter Articles and Recent DevelopmentsDominic McGoldrick, Developments in the Right to be ForgottenMartin Kuijer, The Right to a Fair Trial and the Council of Europe’s Efforts to Ensure Effective Remedies on a Domestic Level for Excessively Lengthy… [read post]
30 Aug 2013, 9:55 am
The High Court distinguished Gillan v UK and found that the powers in Sch 7 were a fair balance between the rights of the individual and the interests of the community. [read post]
11 Jun 2012, 3:40 am
Resolved cases include: A woman v The People, Clause 1, 3, 6, 07/06/2012; Mr David Wieberg v The Guardian, Clause 1, 06/06/2012; Mary Reid v Daily Record, Clause 1, 01/06/2012; A woman v Kent & Sussex Courier, Clauses 1, 5, 6 31/05/2012; Adam Wood v Yorkshire Evening Post, Clause 1, 30/05/2012; Ms Belinda Cunnison v Berwickshire News, Clause 1, 30/05/2012; Mr Ronald Baird v Daventry Express, Clause 1, 30/05/2012; Ms Helen Belcher… [read post]
10 Jun 2012, 7:34 am
The difference between the Dutch case and Gillan and Quinton v UK was that the British legal framework did not comply with these requirements while the Dutch law did. [read post]
30 Mar 2012, 1:01 am
It is they, for example, who point out that in its decision two years before, Gillan v UK, the European Court seems to be firmly of the view (though it decided the case under Article 8) that a stop and search for no more than half an hour could well be enough to constitute a deprivation of liberty. [read post]
19 Jan 2012, 6:24 am
OTHMAN (ABU QATADA) v. [read post]
15 Dec 2011, 6:41 am
Mentioning cases in which he said Strasbourg had rejected the balance of policy interests struck by British courts – S & Marper v UK and Gillan & Quinton v UK – he said British judges should be more assertive, or else they should not be surprised to find themselves rolled over with increasing regularity. [read post]
8 Nov 2011, 6:37 am
(Gillan and Quinton v United Kingdom (2009) The search powers of security personnel at airports were qualitatively different, said the Court. [read post]
