Human Rights, Serious Crime and Criminal Procedure - College of ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table of CasesLooseley [2001] UKHL 53 48Luca v. Italy [2001] Crim.L.R. 747 48Malone v. United Kingdom (A/82) (1984) 7 E.H.R.R. 14; affirming(1983) 5 E.H.R.R. 385 134Martin (1989) 88 Cr.App.R. 343 45Mclntosh v. H.M. Advocate, see HM Advocate v. Mclntosh(Sentencing) sub nom: Mclntosh, Petitioner; Mclntosh(Robert) v. HM Advocate; Mclntosh v. Lord AdvocateMontgomery and Coulter v. H.M. Advocate [2001] 2 W.L.R. 779 ... 68,90Murray v. United Kingdom (1995) 19 E.H.R.R. 193; The Times,November 1, 1994 54, 88Murray v. United Kingdom (Right to Silence) (1996) 22 E.H.R.R.29; The Times, February 9, 1996; Independent, March 1, 1996... 46,47, 64, 88, 89Offen (No. 2) [2001] 1 Cr.App.R. 372 91O'Hara v. Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary[1997] A.C. 286; [1997] 2 W.L.R. 1; [1997] 1 All E.R. 129;[1996] N.I. 8; [1997] 1 Cr.App.R. 447; [1997] Crim.L.R. 432;(1997) 94(2) L.S.G. 26; (1996) 146 N.L.J. 1852; (1997) 141S.J.L.B. 20; The Times, December 13, 1996; Independent,December 18, 1996, HL 48P.G. and J.H. v. United Kingdom, judgment of September 25,2001; The Times, October 19, 2001 48, 92Philcox v. Carberry [1960] Crim.L.R. 563, DC 46Phillips v. U.K. [2001] Crim.L.R. 817 46, 92, 134Quinn v. Ireland, judgment of December 21, 2000 90Ozturk v. Turkey (1984) 6 E.H.R.R. 409 136R. v. Benjafield (Karl Robert) (Confiscation Order); R. v. Leal(Manoj) (Confiscation Order); R. v. Milford (David John);R. v. Rezvi (Syed) [2002] UKHL 2; [2002] 2 W.L.R. 235; TheTimes, January 28, 2002, HL; affirming [2001] 3 W.L.R. 75;[2001] 2 All E.R. 609; [2001] 2 Cr.App.R. 7; [2001] 2Cr.App.R. (S.) 47; [2001] H.R.L.R. 25; 10 B.H.R.C. 19; [2001]Crim.L.R. 245; (2001) 98(12) L.S.G. 41; The Times, December28, 2000; Independent, January 31, 2001, CA (Crim. Div.) 133R. v. Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis, ex p. M andLaRose [2002] Crim.L.R. 213 47XVlll
Table of CasesR. v. DPP, ex p. Kebilene, sub nom.: R. v. DPP, ex p. Kebilene; R.v. DPP Ex p. Boukemiche (Ferine); R. v. DPP, ex p. Souidi(Sofiane); R. v. DPP, ex p. Rechachi [2000] 2 A.C. 326;[1999] 3 W.L.R. 972; [1999] 4 All E.R. 801; [2000] 1Cr.App.R. 275; [2000] H.R.L.R. 93; [2000] U.K.H.R.R. 176;(2000) 2 L.G.L.R. 697; (1999) 11 Admin. L.R. 1026; [2000]Crim.L.R. 486; (1999) 96(43) L.S.G. 32; The Times, November2, 1999, HL; reversing [1999] 3 W.L.R. 175; (1999) 11Admin. L.R. 785; [1999] Crim.L.R. 994; [1999] C.O.D. 207;The Times, March 31, 1999, QBD 46, 88R. (in the application of Daly) v. Home Secretary [2001] 2 W.L.R.1622 89R. v. K [2001] 3 All E.R. 897 136R. v. Landy (Jonathan Mark) (1995) 16 Cr.App.R. (S.) 908; [1995]Crim.L.R. 660, CA 45Rowe v. United Kingdom; Jasper v. United Kingdom; Fitt v.United Kingdom (2000) 30 E.H.R.R. 1; 8 B.H.R.C. 325;[2000] Crim.L.R. 584; The Times, March 1, 2000 ... 48, 89, 90, 129,138S. v. Coetzee and others (1997) (3) SA 527 135Saidi v. France (1993) 17 E.H.R.R. 251 57, 88, 89Salabiaku v. France (1988) 13 E.H.R.R. 379 ... 45, 46, 63, 65, 66, 68, 69,89, 90, 92, 117, 136Sargent [2001] UKHL 54 48Saunders v. United Kingdom [1997] B.C.C. 872; [1998] 1 B.C.L.C.362; (1996) 23 E.H.R.R. 313; 2 B.H.R.C. 358; The Times,December 18,1996; Independent, January 14,1997; affirmingIndependent, September 30, 1994 .. 19, 46, 58, 60, 64, 65, 66, 88, 89,90, 134, 136,138Schenk v. Switzerland (1988) 13 E.H.R.R. 242; The Times, August2, 1988 91Schmerber v. California 384 U.S. 757 (1996) 46Schwartz [1988] 2 S.C. 443 92Silveira [1995] 2 S.C.R. 297 104, 134Soering v. United Kingdom (1989) 11 E.H.R.R. 439; The Times,July 8, 1989; Independent, July 11, 1989; Guardian, July 13,1989; Daily Telegraph, October 2, 1989 89Sporrong and Lonnroth v. Sweden (A/52) (1982) 5 E.H.R.R. 35 89Teixeira de Castro v. Portugal (1999) 28 E.H.R.R. 101; 4 B.H.R.C.533; [1998] Crim.L.R. 751; [1998] H.R.C.D. 8 ... 48, 61, 88, 92, 136Trivedi v. United Kingdom (1997) 89A D.R. 136 48Tyrer v. United Kingdom (1979-1980) 2 E.H.R.R. 1 92U.S. v. Hubbell 120 S.Ct. 2037 (2000) 46xix
Page 1: THEKAMLYNHuman Rights, Serious Crim
Page 11: TABLE OF CONTENTSAcknowledgementsCo
Page 14 and 15: The Hamlyn Lectures1961 British Jus
Page 16 and 17: The Hamlyn Lectures1989 Protection
Page 18 and 19: The Hamlyn TrustProfessor N. Dawson
Page 20 and 21: Table of CasesBrown (Margaret) v. S
Page 24 and 25: Table of CasesVan Mechelen v. Nethe
Page 26 and 27: Why bother with Rights when Public
Page 36 and 37: Why bother with Rights ivhen Public
Page 73:
Why bother with Rights when Public
Page 76 and 77:
Evaluating the Strasbourg and Briti
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Taking a "Balanced" View of the Pub
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
IndexCriminal Justice and Police Ac
Page 166 and 167:
IndexFair trial rights—cont.curta
Page 168 and 169:
IndexPublic interest—cont.fundame
Page 175 and 176:
Does the United Kingdom StillHave a
show all

Human Rights, Serious Crime and Criminal Procedure - College of ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?