Closed Material – London Review of Books

‘Nicholas Phillips on the problems posed by the use of secret evidence.’

Full story

London Review of Books, 17th April 2014

Source: www.lrb.co.uk

Comments Off

Children separated from their families by courts must know why – Daily Telegraph

‘Children separated from their parents in secret family court judgments must be able to find out the reasons for the court’s decisions when they grow up, the most senior family judge has said. Sir James Munby, the President of the Family Division, said it was “great concern” that the judgments of all family court judges were not routinely transcribed and published.’

Full story

Daily Telegraph, 18th May 2014

Source: www.telegraph.co.uk

Comments Off

Police bid to obtain journalistic material refused – Supreme Court – UK Human Rights Blog

Posted March 14th, 2014 in closed material, disclosure, evidence, news, police by tracey

‘R (on the application of British Sky Broadcasting Limited) (Respondent) v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (Appellant) [2014] UKSC 17. This was an appeal from a ruling by the Administrative Court that it was procedurally unfair, and therefore unlawful, for BSkyB to have had a disclosure order made against it without full access to the evidence on which the police’s case was based and the opportunity to comment on or challenge that evidence.’

Full story

UK Human Rights Blog, 13th March 2014

Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com

Comments Off

Regina (British Sky Broadcasting Ltd) v Central Criminal Court (B and another intervening) – WLR Daily

Posted March 14th, 2014 in closed material, disclosure, evidence, law reports, news, police by tracey

Regina (British Sky Broadcasting Ltd) v Central Criminal Court (B and another intervening); [2014] UKSC 17;  [2014] WLR (D)  123

‘On the hearing of an application by a police officer for a production order under section 9 of, and Schedule 1 to, the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, seeking access to journalistic material held by a news organisation for the purposes of an investigation into an alleged offence, the court could not have regard to evidence adduced by the police in support of the application which had not been disclosed to the news organisation.’

WLR Daily, 12th March 2014

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off

Use of disclosed documents – Panopticon

Posted February 10th, 2014 in civil procedure rules, closed material, disclosure, documents, injunctions, news by tracey

‘The important general principle is of course that a party to whom a document has been disclosed in litigation may use that document only for the purpose of the proceedings in which it is disclosed. There are, nonetheless, three significant exceptions to that principle, set out in CPR r31.22(1).’

Full story

Panopticon, 7th February 2014

Source: www.panopticonblog.com

Comments Off

Secret hearings could allow police to seize journalists’ notes if bill passes – The Guardian

Posted February 3rd, 2014 in bills, closed material, disclosure, inquiries, media, news, police by tracey

‘The seizure of journalists’ notebooks, photographs and digital files could be conducted in secret hearings, owing to a little-publicised clause in a government bill aimed at cutting red tape, media organisations have warned. Requests for notebooks, computer disks, photographs or videos must currently be made in open court and representatives of news groups can be present. But the clause – in the deregulation bill, which comes before the Commons on Monday – significantly alters the way courts consider so-called “production orders”, stripping out current safeguards.’

Full story

The Guardian, 31st January 2014

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Comments Off

Sir James Munby: Caesarean mother case shows need for “radical change” in family courts – Daily Telegraph

‘The case of a mother whose baby was taken away following an enforced caesarean is an “irrefutable demonstration of the pressing need for radical change” in the family courts, senior judge says.’

Full story

Daily Telegraph, 17th December 2013

Source: www.telegraph.co.uk

Comments Off

Secret courts: couple tell of their struggle to adopt granddaughter – Daily Telegraph

‘Grandparents of child taken into care by Essex County Council tell of their anguish at not having legal rights to be her guardian.’

Full story

Daily Telegraph, 11th December 2013

Source: www.telegraph.co.uk

Comments Off

Alexander Litvinenko inquest: high court halts lifting of secrecy order – The Guardian

Posted November 27th, 2013 in closed material, coroners, disclosure, inquests, intelligence services, murder, news, Russia by tracey

‘The government has won a high court order to prevent the partial lifting of a secrecy order affecting the proposed inquest into the death of former KGB spy Alexander Litvinenko.’

Full story

The Guardian, 27th November 2013

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Comments Off

CF v Security Service and others; Mohamed v Foreign and Commonwealth Office and others – WLR Daily

CF v Security Service and others; Mohamed v Foreign and Commonwealth Office and others [2013] EWHC 3402 (QB); [2013] WLR (D) 439

“A court could make a declaration under section 6 of the Justice and Security Act 2013 permitting a closed material application to be made to the court before a public interest immunity claim had been made or determined.”

WLR Daily, 7th November 2013

Source: www.iclr.co.uk

Comments Off

The “uneasy” co-existence of public interest immunity and closed material procedure – UK Human Rights Blog

Posted November 8th, 2013 in closed material, damages, human rights, news, public interest immunity, torture by tracey

“CF v Security Service and others and Mohamed v Foreign and Commonwealth Office and others [[2013] EWHC 3402 (QB). The High Court has today made the first court ruling on the use of the Justice and Security Act 2013 in a civil claim for damages.”

Full story

UK Human Rights Blog, 7th November 2013

Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com

Comments Off

Police spies case: women lose fight for public human rights hearing – The Guardian

“A group of women who are taking legal action against police chiefs over claims they were tricked into forming long-term relationships with undercover spies have lost their fight to have part of their case heard in public.”

Full story

The Guardian, 5th November 2013

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Comments Off

High Court orders disclosure of closed judgment in Afghanistan interrogation case – UK Human Rights Blog

Posted October 17th, 2013 in closed material, disclosure, judgments, news, witnesses by sally

“In ‘Evans (No. 1)’, a 2010 case concerning the transfer of suspected insurgents for questioning in certain military centres in Afghanistan, the High Court had ruled, partly in an open judgment, partly in closed proceedings, that UK transfers to NDS Kandahar and NDS Lashkar Gah could proceed without risk of ill treatment (which is contrary to UK policy), but that it would be a breach of the policy and therefore unlawful for transfers to be made to NDS Kabul. It was subsequently discovered that there had not been jurisdiction to follow a closed procedure in that case, but what was done could not be undone, so the confidentiality agreements and the closed judgment remained in force.”

Full story

UK Human Rights Blog, 16th October 2013

Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com

Comments Off

Court case aims to force MoD’s hand with Freedom of Information requests on drones – The Independent

“Britain’s controversial deployment of US-built Reaper drones in Afghanistan will come under scrutiny in court this week in a closed hearing that will see a UK-based drone operator give evidence for the first time.”

Full story

The Independent, 22nd September 2013

Source: www.independent.co.uk

Comments Off

Veils in Court, Grayling and the Left & Legal Aid Anxieties – The Human Rights Roundup

“Welcome back to the UK Human Rights Roundup, your regular breakfast cereal variety box of human rights news and views. The full list of links can be found here. You can find previous roundups here. Post by Sarina Kidd, edited and links compiled by Adam Wagner.”

Full story

UK Human Rights Blog, 16th September 2013

Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com

Comments Off

The Curious Case of Bank Mellat – Dyers Chambers

“On 19 June 2013, the Supreme Court gave judgment in the case of Bank Mellat v HM Treasury (No. 1) and (No. 2). Gavin Irwin reviews the latest developments in the deployment of sanctions against Iran and the tensions that can arise between international organisations, nation states and commercial entities.”

Full story (PDF)

Dyers Chambers, 11th July 2013

Source: www.dyerschambers.com

Comments Off

Christopher Forsyth: Principle or Pragmatism: Closed Material Procedure in the Supreme Court

“In Al Rawi & Ors v The Security Service & Ors [2011] UKSC 34; [2012] 1 AC 531 the claimants (respondents in the Supreme Court) were bringing civil claims for damages against the defendants (appellants in the Supreme Court) alleging complicity by the defendants in their mistreatment by foreign powers (including detention at Guantanamo Bay). The defendants as part of their defence wished to place before the court ‘security sensitive material’ – presumably the evidence of intelligence agents, or similar, denying the complicity – which for security reasons could not be disclosed to the claimants. Thus the defendants submitted that the court hold a “closed material procedure”. They envisaged that the evidence would be placed before the courts in closed session, i.e. a session from which the claimants and their representatives (and the public) were excluded. In the closed session the claimants would be represented by “special advocates” appointed by the court who would have access to the evidence but would not be able to take instructions from the claimants. Such procedures are controversial since they threaten the fundamental principles of open justice and natural justice. On the other hand, the national interest would doubtless be impaired, in some cases, if intelligence agents gave evidence and their methods and secrets were exposed in open court.”

Full story

UK Constitutional Law Group, 29th July 2013

Source: www.ukconstitutionallaw.org

Comments Off

Litvinenko public inquiry blocked: Diplomacy ‘a factor’ – BBC News

“UK-Russian relations were a ‘factor’ in the government’s decision not to hold a public inquiry into the death of former Russian agent Alexander Litvinenko, Home Secretary Theresa May has said.”

Full story

BBC News, 19th July 2013

Source: www.bbc.co.uk

Comments Off

Part 82: The worrying new rules of the Secret Court – UK Human Rights Blog

“While MPs were dreaming of the imminent long summer break and a possible pay hike, in mid-June the Government produced the draft amendments to the Civil Procedure Rules (‘CPR’) necessary to bring Part 2 of the Justice and Security Act 2013 (‘JSA’) into force. Many – including JUSTICE – consider the Act’s introduction of closed material procedures (‘CMP’) into civil proceedings unfair, unnecessary and unjustified.”

Full story

UK Human Rights Blog, 12th July 2013

Source: www.ukhumanrightsblog.com

Comments Off

Bank Mellat: Closed Material Procedures and FOIA – Panopticon

“Last week, the Supreme Court gave judgment in Bank Mellat v Her Majesty’s Treasury (no.1) [2013] UKSC 38. The Bank Mellat case involved financial restrictions imposed by HMT on the Bank under the Counter-Terrorism Act 2008 (“the 2008 Act”), on the basis that it enabled funding for Iran’s nuclear weapons programme. The High Court and Court of Appeal had both adopted a closed material procedure (“CMP”) – i.e. a procedure in which the court sits in private, and hears evidence and/or submissions without one party either being present or seeing the material – in order to consider sensitive material adduced by HMT which could not be disclosed to the Bank. They had specific statutory authority to do so under the 2008 Act. The Supreme Court did not have such authority. The relevant questions were whether it was possible for the Supreme Court to adopt a CMP on appeal, in the absence of specific statutory provision; and if so, whether it was appropriate to do so in that particular case. The Supreme Court was faced with the difficulty of reconciling two strong but opposing interests. On the one hand, it was important that the Court should be able to see and consider any relevant material before the High Court and Court of Appeal. On the other, the Supreme Court itself in Al Rawi v Security Service [2012] 1 AC 531 had uncompromisingly set its face against any derogation from the open justice principle. The Supreme Court was divided; but the majority considered that the Court had implied authority to adopt a CMP under its powers conferred by the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, where the lower courts had themselves used a CMP. Nevertheless, the Court was uncomfortable about doing so, and expressed that discomfort in strong terms.”

Full story

Panopticon, 25th June 2013

Source: www.panopticonblog.com

Comments Off