“A decision by the Parole Board as to whether to direct the release on licence of a prisoner serving an extended sentence under s 227 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 who had not yet finished the custodial part of the imposed term, engaged the right not to be arbitrarily detained under art 5(4) of the European Convention on Human Rights. However, art 5(4) did not require an oral hearing in every case where the question was the assessment of risk to the public, and whether or not an oral hearing was necessary would depend upon the facts.”
WLR Daily, 13th November 2007
Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.
House of Lords
“In determining whether it would be unduly harsh to expect an asylum seeker to relocate to a safe haven in another part of his country, there was no requirement that consideration of conditions in the place of habitual residence had to be the starting point of the assessment. It was for the decision-maker to determine what weight was to be given to that, and all other relevant factors, in the context of the particular facts of the case.”
The Times, 15th November 2007
Please note the Times Law Reports are only available free on Times Online for 21 days from the date of publication.
Daily Telegraph, 15th November 2007
Please note the Daily Telegraph Law Reports are available free online for one week only.
“In the UK, treaty-making is a matter for the Crown acting in conjunction with Parliament. The few instances of referendums and the like are insufficient to give rise to a constitutional convention saying that a referendum must be held if a treaty such as the European Union (EU) Reform Treaty is to be ratified. Whether or not there should be a referendum on the EU Reform Treaty is therefore a political rather than a legal question. This is except for the idea once floated by the Conservative Party of holding a referendum after ratification with a view to backing out of the Reform Treaty if it found against it, which does have legal implications. The professed purpose of such a post-ratification referendum is to engineer a breach by the UK of a legally binding promise that it had entered into freely and in accordance with domestic procedures and processes.”
Legal Week, 15th November 2007
“Leading lawyers are united in the belief that the market downturn will lead to an increase in cases between financial institutions, as firms face up to the prospect of taking on the big banks. Claire Ruckin reports on the results of the latest Big Question survey.”
Legal Week, 15th November 2007
“Gordon Brown is preparing to water down his plan to double the maximum period for which suspected terrorists can be held without charge in an attempt to win all-party agreement for a higher limit. The Prime Minister, who has previously hinted at his support for the limit to be raised from 28 to 56 days, adopted a more conciliatory approach in a Commons statement yesterday.”
The Independent, 15th November 2007