DOCSLIB.ORG

This Electronic Thesis Or Dissertation Has Been Downloaded from Explore Bristol Research

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

This electronic thesis or dissertation has been downloaded from Explore Bristol Research, http://research-information.bristol.ac.uk Author: Jones, Peter John Title: Privacy, photojournalism and the law. General rights Access to the thesis is subject to the Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International Public License. A copy of this may be found at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode This license sets out your rights and the restrictions that apply to your access to the thesis so it is important you read this before proceeding. Take down policy Some pages of this thesis may have been removed for copyright restrictions prior to having it been deposited in Explore Bristol Research. However, if you have discovered material within the thesis that you consider to be unlawful e.g. breaches of copyright (either yours or that of a third party) or any other law, including but not limited to those relating to patent, trademark, confidentiality, data protection, obscenity, defamation, libel, then please contact [email protected] and include the following information in your message: •Your contact details •Bibliographic details for the item, including a URL •An outline nature of the complaint Your claim will be investigated and, where appropriate, the item in question will be removed from public view as soon as possible. JONES Peter John Privacy, Photojournalism and the Law (Ph. D. Thesis) A dissertation submitted to the University of Bristol in accordance with the requirementsof the degreeof PhD in the Faculty of Law Submitted May 2000 65,169 Words Abstract It is the contention of this thesis that individual privacy is so important that it deserves to be protected by law against incursion by the photojournalism industry. That is not to say, however, that this thesis advocates the creation of any nebulous right to privacy that is enforceable against the press. This thesis challenges the view of those who argue that the term privacy itself may be defined with sufficient precision to formulate discrete and unambiguous legislation. A preferable approach, it is argued is for the legislature to recognise the more specific forms of behavioural tort committed by the photojournalism industry. In particular, detailed examination of the existing common law and legislation and its likely scope for development reveals that parasitic claims under pre-existing torts fail to compensate one for the distant photographer who utilises a long lens camera to spy only for a transient or irregular period of time. A tort prohibiting an individual from observing, monitoring, or recording the activities of another without consent where he knows or ought to know the other has a justifiable expectation of seclusion would still prove a valuable addition therefore to our laws. The publication of such photographs and the personal information they reveal about an individual's lifestyle and relationships also give cause for concern. Nevertheless, an expanding equitable doctrine of breach of confidence and the potential influence of the Human Rights Act 1998 upon the interpretation of the Data Protection Act 1998 make this a less pressing concern in view of an efficient self-regulatory system. Should the Human Rights Act fail to have the effect prophesied, the author recommends that only then should the further consideration be given to enshrining the Press Complaints Commission code of practice relating to the publication of such photographs in statutory law. ii Dedication and Acknowledgements Dedicated to my family and friends for their continued support for a busy scholar. With kind regards to the editorial board of the Law Teacher, European Public Law, Litigation and the European Intellectual Property Review for publishing much of the work generated by this thesis. 111 Author's Declaration AUTHOR'S DECLARATION I declare that the work in this dissertation was carried out in accordance with the Regulations of the University of Bristol. The work is original except where indicated by special reference in the text and no part of the dissertation has been submitted for any other degree. Any views expressedin this dissertation are those of the author and in no way representthose of the University of Bristol. The dissertation has not been presentedto any other University for examination either in the United Kingdom or overseas. SIGNED: DATE: )$ fO /oo iv Table of Contents i Title Page ii Abstract iii Dedications and Acknowledgements iv Author's Declaration v Table of Contents vi Table of United Kingdom Cases x Table of Casesfrom Other Jurisdictions xiii Table of PressComplaints Commission Jurisprudence xiv Table of United Kingdom Legislation xvi Table of Legislation from Other Jurisdictions xvi Table of International Instruments xvii Bibliography 1 Chapter One - Introduction / Defining privacy and what the law ought to protect: narrow duties or broad rights? 27 Chapter Two - Curiosity's tort: the legality of paparazzi methods to obtain photographs 59 Chapter Three - Unauthorised publication of intrusively obtained photographs by newspapers and the law of tort 80 Chapter Four - The expandingdoctrine of breach of confidence domestic 108 Chapter Five - The influence of the EuropeanConvention upon laws relating to photojournalism and their future evolution 137 Chapter Six - Arguments against legislation? 161 Chapter Seven- Summary and Conclusions List of Illustrations 8 Fig. 1, Chapter One. The composite nucleus of privacy 9 Fig. 2, Chapter One. The Ruiz conception of privacy List of Tables 147 Fig.!, Chapter Six. Percentage of total complaints received by the PCC relating to privacy V TABLE OF UNITED KINGDOM CASES A-B & Others v South West Water ServicesLtd [1993] Q.B. 507, C.A. 30,57 Abernethy v Hutchinson (1825) 1H& TW 33 88,101 A-G v B. B. C. [1981] A. C. 303 112 Allan v Liverpool (Overseers)Ltd [1874] 9 Q.B. L. R. 180 31 Allason v Campbell (1996) Times, May 8 72 American Cynamid v Ethicon Ltd [1975] A. C. 396 67 Attorney-General v Guardian Newspaper(No. 2) [1990] 1 A. C. 109 84-85,92-94,98 Attorney-General v Guardian Newspapers(No. 2) [1988] 2 W. L. R. 805 104 Balden v Shorter [1933] 1 Ch.430 71 Benjamin v Storr (1874) L. R. 9 C.P. 400 39 Bernstein v Skyviews Ltd [1978] Q.B. 479 32,33,38,151-152 Betterton's Case(1689) Holt. 538 37 Bone v Seale[1975] 1 W. L. R. 797, C.A. 67 Bonnard v Perryman [1891] 2 Ch.269, C.A. 91 Bowley v The Sun Newspaper [1988] Feb 5 (Unreported) 106 British Steel Corporation v GranadaTelevision Ltd [1981] A. C. 1096 106 Broome v Cassell & Co. [1972] A. C. 1027 26,69 Burdett v Abbott (1811) 14 East 1 28 Burnett v AssociatedNewspapers Ltd (1901) 23 T. L. R. 666 73 Burnett v George (1992) 1 F.L. R. 525, C.A. 48,52,54,130 Burnett v Tak (1892) 45 L. T. 743 70 Burris v Azadani [1995] 1 W. L. R. 1372 53-55 CvC (application for non-molestationorder) [1998] 1 F.C. R. 11 80 Cv Mirror Group Newspapers[1996] 2 F.L. R. 532, C.A. 72 Cassidy v Daily Mirror NewspapersLtd [1929] 2 K. B. 331, C.A. 67 Chamberlain v Boyd (1883) 11 Q.B. D. 407 74 Charlestonv News Group Newspapers[ 1994] 2 A. C. 64, H. L. 66 Cinnamond v British Airports Authority [1980] 1 W. L. R. 582 34 Coco v A. N. Clark (Engineers) Ltd [1969] RPC 41 83,89,91,97,106 Cork v McVicar [1984] Times, 31 Oct 93 Creation Records v News Group Newspapers [1997] Times, April 29,100 Ch.D. Crown River Cruises Ltd v Kimbolten Fireworks Ltd [1996] 2 Lloyd's 38 Rep 533 Cunard and Wife v Antifyre Ltd [1933] 1 K. B. 551 38 D. P.P. v Jonesand Lloyd [1997] 2 ALL ER 119, Q.B. D. 33-35 Digby v Financial News Ltd [1907] 1 K. B. 502, C.A. 68 Duchessof Argyll v Duke of Argyll [1967] 1 Ch.302 83,95 Duke of Queensburyv Shebbeare(1758) 2 Eden 329 87 Dunlop Rubber Co.Ltd v Dunlop [1921] A. C. 367 65 Dutton and Others v ManchesterAirport plc [1999] 2 ALL ER 675, C.A. 31 E.Warnink B. V. v Townend & Sons (Hull) Ltd [1979] A. C. 731 76 Ellis v Marhall & Son (1865) 64 L. J. (Q.B) 757 61 Entick v Carrington (1765) 19 How. St.Tr. 1030 33 Fielding and Another v Variety Inc. [1967] 2 Q.B. 841, C.A. 75 Francomev Mirror Group Newspapers[ 1984] 1 W. L. R. 892; 2 ALL ER 408 90,100 Fraserv Evans [1968] 1 Q.B. 349 103 Fritz v Hobson (1880) 14 Ch.D 542 38 Garland v British Rail [1983] 2 A. C. 751 120 Gartside v Outram [1856] 26 LJ.Ch 113 93 vi Gee v Pritchard (1818) 2 Swan 402 101 GreersLtd v Pearmanand Corder Ltd (1922) 2 K. B. 260 72 Griffiths v Bonsor Hosiery Ltd [1935] Times, Dec 10-11 66 H. R.H. Princessof Wales v MGN NewspapersLtd [1993] 8/11/93 (Unreported) 84-86 H. R. H. Princess of Wales v Stenning [1996] (Unreported) The Times, Aug 17 49 Halliwell and Others v Panini SpA and Others (1997) June 6, (Unreported) 77 Halsey v Brotherhood (1881) 19 Ch.D 386 71 Harrison v Duke of Rutland [1893] 1 Q.B. 142, C.A. 34 Harrods v Harrodian School Ltd (1996) Times, April 3 77 Hellewell v Chief Constableof Derbyshire [1995] 1 W. L. R. 804 99-100 Hickman v Maisey [ 1900] 1 Q.B. 752, C.A. 34 Horrocks v Lowe [1975] A. C. 135 72 Hubbard v Pitt [1976] Q.B. 142 34 Hubbard v Vosper [1972] 2 K.
Recommended publications
  • 198J. M. Thornton Phd.Pdf

    198J. M. Thornton Phd.Pdf

    Kent Academic Repository Full text document (pdf) Citation for published version Thornton, Joanna Margaret (2015) Government Media Policy during the Falklands War. Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) thesis, University of Kent. DOI Link to record in KAR https://kar.kent.ac.uk/50411/ Document Version UNSPECIFIED Copyright & reuse Content in the Kent Academic Repository is made available for research purposes. Unless otherwise stated all content is protected by copyright and in the absence of an open licence (eg Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher, author or other copyright holder. Versions of research The version in the Kent Academic Repository may differ from the final published version. Users are advised to check http://kar.kent.ac.uk for the status of the paper. Users should always cite the published version of record. Enquiries For any further enquiries regarding the licence status of this document, please contact: [email protected] If you believe this document infringes copyright then please contact the KAR admin team with the take-down information provided at http://kar.kent.ac.uk/contact.html Government Media Policy during the Falklands War A thesis presented by Joanna Margaret Thornton to the School of History, University of Kent In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the subject of History University of Kent Canterbury, Kent January 2015 ©Joanna Thornton All rights reserved 2015 Abstract This study addresses Government media policy throughout the Falklands War of 1982. It considers the effectiveness, and charts the development of, Falklands-related public relations’ policy by departments including, but not limited to, the Ministry of Defence (MoD).
  • Print Journalism: a Critical Introduction

    Print Journalism: a Critical Introduction

    Print Journalism A critical introduction Print Journalism: A critical introduction provides a unique and thorough insight into the skills required to work within the newspaper, magazine and online journalism industries. Among the many highlighted are: sourcing the news interviewing sub-editing feature writing and editing reviewing designing pages pitching features In addition, separate chapters focus on ethics, reporting courts, covering politics and copyright whilst others look at the history of newspapers and magazines, the structure of the UK print industry (including its financial organisation) and the development of journalism education in the UK, helping to place the coverage of skills within a broader, critical context. All contributors are experienced practising journalists as well as journalism educators from a broad range of UK universities. Contributors: Rod Allen, Peter Cole, Martin Conboy, Chris Frost, Tony Harcup, Tim Holmes, Susan Jones, Richard Keeble, Sarah Niblock, Richard Orange, Iain Stevenson, Neil Thurman, Jane Taylor and Sharon Wheeler. Richard Keeble is Professor of Journalism at Lincoln University and former director of undergraduate studies in the Journalism Department at City University, London. He is the author of Ethics for Journalists (2001) and The Newspapers Handbook, now in its fourth edition (2005). Print Journalism A critical introduction Edited by Richard Keeble First published 2005 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, OX9 4RN Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada by Routledge 270 Madison Ave, New York, NY 10016 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2005. “To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledge’s collection of thousands of eBooks please go to www.eBookstore.tandf.co.uk.” Selection and editorial matter © 2005 Richard Keeble; individual chapters © 2005 the contributors All rights reserved.
  • Legality of the Use of Force Against Iraq International Law and the War with Iraq

    Legality of the Use of Force Against Iraq International Law and the War with Iraq

    FEATURE — LEGALITY OF THE USE OF FORCE AGAINST IRAQ INTERNATIONAL LAW AND THE WAR WITH IRAQ International Law and the War with Iraq ALEX J BELLAMY* [The United States-led invasion of Iraq prompted a widespread debate about the legitimacy and legality of the use of force without explicit United Nations authorisation. Some argued that the invasion enjoyed the implied authorisation of the Security Council, suggesting that Resolution 678, a remnant of the first Gulf War, continued to authorise the use of force to ensure Iraqi compliance with the Gulf War cease-fire. The US government further argued that Iraq posed an imminent threat to its neighbours, to the US and to international peace and security. On this basis, the US asserted a right to pre-emptive self-defence. This article evaluates these legal claims in depth. It exploring the background to the war, and asks whether or not the Security Council did implicitly authorise the war. Having assessed the statements of Security Council members, it suggests that the resolutions passed at the time of the first Gulf War were not intended to authorise subsequent uses of force. Nor, it is argued, did Resolution 1441, passed in November 2002, provide implicit authorisation for the use of force. Given the substance of the reports of Hans Blix, Executive Chairman of the UN Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission, and the subsequent failure to discover weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the self-defence argument is also untenable. Indeed, to accept either of the legal justifications proposed
  • Sir Simon Jenkins Journalist and Author

    Sir Simon Jenkins Journalist and Author

    Sir Simon Jenkins Journalist and Author Media Masters – February 11, 2016 Listen to the podcast online, visit www.mediafocus.org.uk Welcome to Media Masters, a series of one-to-one interviews with people at the top of the media game. Today, I’m joined by the editor and columnist Simon Jenkins. Simon might be the grandest of British journalism grandees. Knighted for services to the industry in 2004, he edited the London Evening Standard and the Times, covered politics for The Economist, and founded the Sunday Times book pages. Now known for his views on politics and culture as a columnist at the Guardian, he has also held public appointments at British Rail, English Heritage, and was a member of the Millennium Commission. Having recently ended his six-year term as chairman of the National Trust, he has written more than 15 books on topics as diverse as English churches, Thatcher, and of course, the media. Simon, thank you for joining me. Thank you! Did you always want to be a journalist? How did you get started? I think I wanted to be a politician – I know very few journalists who didn’t really want to be a politician somewhere deep down inside them. But I started journalism at university at Oxford, I have a totally conventional education story, doing PPE at Oxford – that’s philosophy, politics and economics – I worked on Cherwell, I left, went into academia, and was an academic for about two or three years, but I craved journalism. Went into journalism, I was quite political, I’d got involved in sort of left- wing Tory pressure groups and so on, but all the time I just thought, “Politics is boring compared to journalism,” and it was just… journalism sucked me in.
  • THE BRITISH INSTITUTE of INTERNATIONAL and COMPARATIVE LAW Charles Clore House, 17 Russell Square, London WC1B 5JP

    THE BRITISH INSTITUTE of INTERNATIONAL and COMPARATIVE LAW Charles Clore House, 17 Russell Square, London WC1B 5JP

    THE BRITISH INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL AND COMPARATIVE LAW Charles Clore House, 17 Russell Square, London WC1B 5JP Tel: (+44)(0)20 7862 5151 E-mail: [email protected] Fax: (+44)(0)20 7862 5152 No. 2 www.biicl.org APRIL 2004 NEWSLETTER Development Appeal: £2 million target reached in donations and pledges Due to the hard work of the Development Appeal Committee, chaired by Lord Goff of Chieveley, the generosity of individuals and trusts and the willingness of companies and firms to become more actively involved in the Institute on an ongoing basis, we are pleased to announce that our initial target of raising £2 million has been achieved. Through the activities of the Appeal we have been able to establish a number of new activities. Last year saw the launch of both the Competition Law Forum and the Data Protection Research and Policy Group, and the establishment of the Company Law Centre. The Dorset Fellow in Public International Law is funded for five years. Our successes have encouraged us that there is strong support for the Institute both within the profession and beyond. It is evident that there is much that the Institute could achieve, given the funds and opportunity to do so. It is to this end that the Institute has established a Development Board to continue to look at ways in which the Institute can increase its activity and develop its role as the leading institute for international and comparative law. The Development Appeal and Development Board aim is to increase the funding of ongoing activities of the Institute.
  • Runnymede Trust Conference: What Magna Carta and the Race

    Runnymede Trust Conference: What Magna Carta and the Race

    RUNNYMEDE TRUST CONFERENCE WHAT MAGNA CARTA AND THE RACE RELATIONS ACT MEAN TO US TODAY SIR RABINDER SINGH 29 JULY 2015 1. I am honoured to have been invited to address you today. The Runnymede Trust is the leading organisation in this country dedicated to the promotion of racial equality. When it was founded in 1968 by Jim Rose and Anthony Lester it took its name from the meadow by the Thames where the first Magna Carta was sealed in 1215. I am particularly pleased that, among the understandable and widespread commemorations of the 800th anniversary of Magna Carta, the opportunity has not been lost also to remember that this is the 50th Anniversary of the first Race Relations Act in this country. 2. At first sight it is not obvious that there is any link between the two. It is well- known that Magna Carta was sealed as part of a power struggle between King John and the Barons. They would hardly have been interested in creating an equal society. Furthermore, many of the references in Magna Carta itself are based on distinctions between people depending on their status: the reference to “all free men” clearly excluded those who were villeins. The institution of 1 serfdom was very much alive at that time. And there were provisions in the 1215 version of Magna Carta which on their face discriminated against Jews. 3. Lord Sumption, who is not only a Justice of the Supreme Court but a distinguished historian, has described the sentiments which often surround Magna Carta as “high minded tosh.”1 Although it is undoubtedly correct to question whether many of the modern readings of Magna Carta have any basis in historical fact, it is also important to recall that the mythology surrounding such documents can itself have continuing impact on a society.
  • Black Letter Law 2006

    Black Letter Law 2006

    Black Letter Law The presence of black and ethnic minorities in the legal profession A CRE/BLD publication for Black History Month Introductions Contents The idea to do this booklet came from Debo Nwauzu, Director of the Black Legal history 11 Rabinder Singh QC Lawyers Directory (BLD). The Commission for Racial Equality (CRE) 2 Ganendra Mohan Tagore 11 District Judge Ray Singh agreed to undertake this project thinking that it would be fairly simple to 2 Alexander Kennedy 12 Keith Vaz MP get the information from the Law Society and the Bar Council and put it all 2 Thomas Morris Chester 12 Thelma Stober together. But this has not been very easy. We approached the Law Society 3 Aviet Agabeg 13 Shami Chakrabarti and the Bar Council for their assistance in researching their records - they 3 Christian Frederick Cole 14 Courtenay Griffiths QC have been very helpful in making extensive enquiries - however, neither 3 Mahatma Ghandi 14 Anesta Weekes QC organisation had much information that was relevant. 4 Muhammad Jinnah 15 Sadiq Khan MP This lack of information is significant and reflects that until fairly 4 Jawaharlal Nehru 16 District Judge Shamim recently these organisations did not collect monitoring data on their 5 Cornelia Sorabji Qureshi members. This problem also illustrates how important it is to undertake 16 David Lammy MP monitoring. Legal history in the making 17 Icah Peart QC This is a work in progress. We hope to build on this publication in future 6 Nelson Mandela 17 Trevor Faure years so that there is a more detailed chronicle of black and minority ethnic 6 Dr John Roberts QC 17 Gifty Edila (BME) individuals in the legal profession who are or were in the vanguard 7 Baroness Patricia Scotland 18 Chris Boothman of the struggle to make the profession more diverse and representative.
  • The Educational Backgrounds of Leading Journalists

    The Educational Backgrounds of Leading Journalists

    The Educational Backgrounds of Leading Journalists June 2006 NOT FOR PUBLICATION BEFORE 00.01 HOURS THURSDAY JUNE 15TH 2006 1 Foreword by Sir Peter Lampl In a number of recent studies the Sutton Trust has highlighted the predominance of those from private schools in the country’s leading and high profile professions1. In law, we found that almost 70% of barristers in the top chambers had attended fee-paying schools, and, more worryingly, that the young partners in so called ‘magic circle’ law firms were now more likely than their equivalents of 20 years ago to have been independently-educated. In politics, we showed that one third of MPs had attended independent schools, and this rose to 42% among those holding most power in the main political parties. Now, with this study, we have found that leading news and current affairs journalists – those figures who are so central in shaping public opinion and national debate – are more likely than not to have been to independent schools which educate just 7% of the population. Of the top 100 journalists in 2006, 54% were independently educated an increase from 49% in 1986. Not only does this say something about the state of our education system, but it also raises questions about the nature of the media’s relationship with society: is it healthy that those who are most influential in determining and interpreting the news agenda have educational backgrounds that are so different to the vast majority of the population? What is clear is that an independent school education offers a tremendous boost to the life chances of young people, making it more likely that they will attain highly in school exams, attend the country’s leading universities and gain access to the highest and most prestigious professions.
  • 1 ETHEL BENJAMIN COMMEMORATIVE ADDRESS 2010 DIGNITY Rt Hon Baroness Hale of Richmond Justice of the Supreme Court of the United

    1 ETHEL BENJAMIN COMMEMORATIVE ADDRESS 2010 DIGNITY Rt Hon Baroness Hale of Richmond Justice of the Supreme Court of the United

    ETHEL BENJAMIN COMMEMORATIVE ADDRESS 2010 DIGNITY Rt Hon Baroness Hale of Richmond Justice of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom It is a great delight to be back in New Zealand. I have fond memories of our first trip here in 1993, the centenary of your pioneering decision to give women the vote. I picked up a facsimile copy of a small poster from 1893 headed “Notice to Epicene Women”. It advised electioneering women that they were not wanted at that address and should get back to looking after their homes and their husbands. When I joined the Court of Appeal in England I put it up on the door of my chambers – mainly as a joke, but also to catch people’s eyes, and make them wonder where and when such sentiments could have been uttered. Hopefully, although I was the only woman on the court then, my colleagues would recognise that such things could never be said today. But I miscalculated. One day the poster disappeared. A colleague had taken it down. He was not so sure who had put it there or whether it was a joke. So it is even more of a delight to be back here celebrating the memory of Ethel Benjamin. If New Zealand deserves great credit for giving women the vote, long before anyone else in the English speaking world, it deserves at least as much credit for giving women the right to practise law, if not so far ahead of the rest of the English speaking world, then at least long before “the mother country” and with much less fuss and bother than anywhere else.
  • British Iraq War Legality

    British Iraq War Legality

    Regina (Gentle and Another) v. Prime Minister and Others Appeal to the United Kingdom House of Lords [Legality of Iraq War Case] 2008 U.K.H.L. Rep. 20, 2 World Law Rep. 879, 2008 WestLaw 833633 (April 9, 2008) Author’s Note: This suit did not seek money damages. The plaintiffs are parents of soldiers who were killed in the Iraq War. They alleged that the Article 2 “Right to Life” provision of the European Convention on Human Rights was an appropriate basis for a judicial assessment of the legality of the Iraq War. Per the House of Lords (final possible appeal venue) practice, each of the selected judges provides his/her views on the issue presented. Portions of overlapping analyses have been deleted. Bracketed inserts have been added at the beginning of each opinion, as a signpost for the gist of each opinion. The paragraph numbers are those of the House of Lords. The original British spelling has been retained. The term “[E.C.H.R.]” refers to European Convention on Human Rights. Court’s Opinion: APPEAL from the Court of Appeal . LORD BINGHAM OF CORNHILL [facts and legal provisions] 1 My Lords. The claimants are the mothers of two young men, both aged 19, who lost their lives while serving in the British army in Iraq. Fusilier Gordon Campbell Gentle … was killed by a roadside bomb on 28 June 2004. Trooper David Jeffrey Clarke … was killed by “friendly fire” on 25 March 2003. These deaths have been fully investigated at duly-constituted inquests conducted in the United Kingdom, and there are no outstanding questions about when, where and in what circumstances they respectively died.
  • Justice Journal

    Justice Journal

    JUSTICE JOURNAL The JUSTICE Journal aims to promote debate on topical issues relating to human rights and the rule of law. It focuses on JUSTICE’s core areas of expertise and concern: • human rights • criminal justice • equality • EU justice and home affairs • the rule of law • access to justice www.justice.org.uk JUSTICE – advancing justice, human rights and the rule of law JUSTICE is an independent law reform and human rights organisation. It works largely through policy- orientated research; interventions in court proceedings; education and training; briefings, lobbying and policy advice. It is the British section of the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ). The JUSTICE Journal editorial advisory board: Philip Havers QC, One Crown Office Row Barbara Hewson, Hardwicke Civil Professor Carol Harlow, London School of Economics Anthony Edwards, TV Edwards JUSTICE, 59 Carter Lane, London EC4V 5AQ Tel: +44 (0)20 7329 5100 Fax: +44 (0)20 7329 5055 E-mail: [email protected] www.justice.org.uk © JUSTICE 2008 ISSN 1743-2472 Designed by Adkins Design Printed by Hobbs the Printers Ltd, Southampton Contents JUSTICE Journal Contents Editorial People, participation and process 4 Roger Smith Papers Towards a bill of rights and responsibility 8 The Rt Hon Jack Straw MP The law and faith lecture series organised by the London School of Economics and Political Science law department with JUSTICE God in public? Reflections on faith and society 17 The Bishop of Durham, Dr N T Wright, with a comment by Rabinder Singh QC Is Islamic law ethical? 37
  • A, K, M, Q & G HM Treasury

    A, K, M, Q & G HM Treasury

    Neutral Citation Number: [2008] EWHC 869 (Admin) Case No: PTA 13, 14, 15, 17 & 19/2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION ADMINISTRATIVE COURT Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Date: 24 April 2008 Before: Mr Justice Collins Between: A, K, M, Q & G Applicants - and - H.M. Treasury Respondent Mr Tim Owen, Q.C. & Mr Dan Squires (instructed by Birnberg Peirce) for the Applicants, A, K & M & (instructed by Public Law Solicitors) for the Applicant Q Mr Rabinder Singh, Q.C. & Mr Richard Hermer (instructed by Tuckers) for the Applicant G Mr Jonathan Crow, Q.C. & Mr Andrew O’Connor (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the Respondent Hearing dates: 8 & 9 April 2008 Judgment Approved by the court for handing down (subject to editorial corrections) Judgment Approved by the court for handing down A,K, M, Q & G and H.M. Treasury (subject to editorial corrections) Mr Justice COLLINS : 1. All five applicants have been subjected to freezing orders over their assets in accordance with the Terrorism ( United Nations Measures) Order 2006 (2006 No.2657) (the TO). In G’s case, there is also an order against him by virtue of the Al-Qaida and Taliban (United Nations Measures) Order 2006 (2006 No. 2952) (the AQO). Each order contains a provision (Article 5(4)) whereby ;- “The High Court … may set aside a direction on the application of – (a) the person identified in the direction, or (b) any other person affected by the direction.” The applications before me are made under those Articles.