Al Rawi and others v Security Service and others – WLR daily

Al Rawi and others v Security Service and others [2010] EWCA Civ 482; [2010] WLR (D) 111

“It was not open to a court in England and Wales, in the absence of statutory power to do so or, arguably, agreement between the parties that the case should proceed on such a basis, to order a closed material procedure in respect of the trial of an ordinary civil claim such as a claim for damages for tort or breach of statutory duty.”

WLR Daily, 5th May 2010

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Al Rawi and others v Security Service and others – WLR Daily

Al Rawi and others v Security Service and others [2009] EWHC 2959 (QB); [2009] WLR (D) 335

It could be lawful and proper for a court to order that a closed material procedure (avoiding disclosure of material contrary to the public interest otherwise than to special advocates) be adopted in a civil claim for damages.

WLR Daily, 19th November 2009

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

Secrecy bid over detainees’ case – BBC News

Posted October 28th, 2009 in closed material, damages, detention, disclosure, intelligence services, news by sally

“Lawyers for MI5 and MI6 have launched an unprecedented attempt to stop secret material being disclosed during a case brought by ex-Guantanamo Bay detainees.”

Full story

BBC News, 27th October 2009

Source: www.bbc.co.uk

Secretary of State for the Home Department v AF (No 3); Same v AN; Same v AE – WLR Daily

Secretary of State for the Home Department v AF (No 3); Same v AN; Same v AE [2009] UKHL 28; [2009] WLR (D) 180

“Where, in the interests of national security, the Secretary of State relied on closed material in a hearing under s 3(10) of the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 to justify his decision to make a control order, art 6(1) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as scheduled to the Human Rights Act 1998, would not be satisfied unless the controlee were given sufficient information on the case against him to enable him to give effective instructions to the special advocate appointed to represent him.”

WLR Daily, 11th June 2009

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

RB (Algeria) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; U (Algeria) v Same; Othman v Same – WLR Daily

Posted February 19th, 2009 in appeals, closed material, deportation, immigration, law reports, torture by sally

RB (Algeria) v Secretary of State for the Home Department; U (Algeria) v Same; Othman v Same [2009] UKHL 10; [2009] WLR (D) 60

“Appeals from the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (‘SIAC’) were restricted to matters of law or irrationality. SIAC was entitled to have regard to closed material and to assurances given by their governments in concluding that appellants would not, if deported, face a real risk of inhuman treatment contrary to art 3 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms or violation of the right to a fair trial under art 6.”

WLR Daily, 18th February 2009

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.

MT (Algeria) and others v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (Liberty intervening) – WLR Daily

Posted August 1st, 2007 in closed material, deportation, law reports, refugees, torture by sally

MT (Algeria) and others v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (Liberty intervening) [2007] EWCA Civ 808

“When considering whether an applicant was at risk of torture or ill-treatment contrary to art 3 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms if deported to his home state on the ground of national security the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (‘SIAC”’ was entitled to have regard to closed as well as open material in scrutinising the case under the statutory scheme. A person who had been recognised as a refugee could lose his status under art 1F(c) of the Convention and Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees if he were guilty of acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations after recognition.”

WLR Daily, 30th July 2007

Source: www.lawreports.co.uk

Please note once a case has been fully reported in one of the ICLR series the corresponding WLR Daily summary is removed.