header-logo header-logo

26 February 2020 / Philip Rule
Issue: 7876 / Categories: Features , Public , Human rights , Criminal
printer mail-detail

False imprisonment: common ground?

16656
Barrister Philip Rule examines the relationship between false imprisonment & Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights

 

IN BRIEF

 

  • Common law rights: alive and functioning.
  • Unlawful imprisonment at common law not limited to occasions of a deprivation of liberty in Art 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

On 12 February 2020 Lady Hale delivered the unanimous judgment of the Supreme Court in R (on the application of Jalloh (formerly Jollah)) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2020] UKSC 4, [2020] All ER (D) 56 (Feb).

The particularly interesting legal question was whether imprisonment in tort law ought to be aligned with the concept of deprivation of liberty (distinct from a, lesser, restriction of liberty) in the jurisprudence of Art 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention).

 

Appeal

 

The secretary of state appealed against the claim which had succeeded below (leading to damages in the sum of £4000) and argued that the two concepts should be aligned. She did so

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll