03.06.2014 Views

JOURNALS HOUSE OF LORDS - United Kingdom Parliament

JOURNALS HOUSE OF LORDS - United Kingdom Parliament

JOURNALS HOUSE OF LORDS - United Kingdom Parliament

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

2005 16th February<br />

191<br />

Bingham of Cornhill, L.<br />

Brown of Eaton-under-<br />

Heywood, L.<br />

Wednesday 16th February 2005<br />

The House met at a quarter past four o’clock.<br />

The following Lords Spiritual and Temporal were present:<br />

Carswell, L.<br />

Nicholls of Birkenhead, L.<br />

Oxford, Bp.<br />

PRAYERS were read by the Lord Bishop of Oxford.<br />

Rodger of Earlsferry, L.<br />

Steyn, L.<br />

Walker of Gestingthorpe, L.<br />

Judicial Business<br />

1. J I MacWilliam Company Inc (Respondents) v. Mediterranean Shipping Company SA<br />

(Appellants)—It was moved by the Lord Bingham of Cornhill, That the 19th Report from the<br />

Appellate Committee be agreed to; the motion was agreed to. It was ordered and adjudged<br />

that the Order of the Court of Appeal of 24th January 2003 be aYrmed and the appeal<br />

dismissed with costs, the amount thereof to be certified by the Clerk of the <strong>Parliament</strong>s if not<br />

agreed between the parties. [2005] UKHL 11<br />

2. Regina v. Smith (Appellant) (2004) (No. 2) (On Appeal from the Court of Appeal (Criminal<br />

Division))—<br />

3. Regina v. Mercieca (Appellant) (On Appeal from the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division))—<br />

It was moved by the Lord Bingham of Cornhill, That the 20th Report from the Appellate<br />

Committee be agreed to; the motion was agreed to. It was ordered and adjudged that the<br />

Orders of the Court of Appeal Criminal Division of 19th December 2003 be set aside and the<br />

convictions of the appellants in the Central Criminal Court of 30th May 2002 quashed; that<br />

both parts of the certified question be answered in the negative; and that the cases of both<br />

appellants be remitted to the Court of Appeal to determine whether to order a new trial. [2005]<br />

UKHL 12<br />

4. Regina v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent) ex parte Al-Hasan (FC)<br />

(Appellant)—<br />

5. Regina v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent) ex parte Carroll (FC)<br />

(Appellant)—<br />

(Conjoined Appeals)—<br />

It was moved by the Lord Bingham of Cornhill, That the 21st Report from the Appellate<br />

Committee be agreed to; the motion was agreed to. It was ordered and adjudged that the<br />

Orders of the Court of Appeal of 19th July 2001 and also the Orders of Mr Justice Newman<br />

in the Administrative Court of the Queen’s Bench Division of 16th February 2001 be set aside;<br />

and that the findings of guilt recorded against both appellants in their respective prison records<br />

be quashed and deleted; that the Respondent do pay to the Appellants their costs here and<br />

below; and that the Appellants’ costs be taxed in accordance with the Access to Justice Act<br />

1999. [2005] UKHL 13<br />

6. Regina v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent) ex parte Greenfield (FC)<br />

(Appellant)—It was moved by the Lord Bingham of Cornhill, That the 22nd Report from the<br />

Appellate Committee be agreed to; the motion was agreed to. It was ordered and adjudged<br />

that the Order of the Court of Appeal of 19th July 2001 and also the Order of the Divisional<br />

Court of the Queen’s Bench Division of 22nd February 2001 be set aside; that there be no<br />

award of damages; and that it be declared “(1) that the Secretary of State for the Home<br />

Department acted unlawfully by failing to provide the appellant with a hearing before an<br />

independent tribunal, contrary to article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights;<br />

and (2) that the Secretary of State for the Home Department acted unlawfully by refusing to<br />

allow the appellant to be legally represented, contrary to article 6(3) of the European<br />

Convention on Human Rights.” That the question of costs be adjourned in order that the<br />

parties may make written submissions within 14 days; and that the costs of the appellant in<br />

this House be taxed in accordance with the Access to Justice Act 1999. [2005] UKHL 14<br />

7. Szuluk (FC) (Petitioner) v. Governor of HMP Full Sutton and another (Respondents)—The<br />

petition of Edward Szuluk praying for leave to appeal was presented and referred to an Appeal<br />

Committee. The petitioner’s certificate of public funding was lodged.<br />

8. R (on the application of Nilsen) (FC) (Petitioner) v. Governor of HMP Full Sutton and another<br />

(Respondents)—The petition of Denis Andrew Nilsen praying for leave to appeal<br />

notwithstanding that the time limited by Standing Order II has expired was presented and<br />

referred to an Appeal Committee. The petitioner’s certificate of public funding was lodged.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!