header-logo header-logo

17 October 2009
Issue: 7389 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Hacker appeal refused

Gary McKinnon, the Asperger’s sufferer who faces extradition to the US for hacking into Pentagon military networks, has been refused permission to apply for judicial review against the director of public prosecutions.

Gary McKinnon, the Asperger’s sufferer who faces extradition to the US for hacking into Pentagon military networks, has been refused permission to apply for judicial review against the director of public prosecutions.

In R (on the application of Gary McKinnon) v Home Secretary [2009] EWHC 2449 (Admin), Stanley Burnton LJ found McKinnon’s extradition was “a lawful and proportionate response to his alleged offending” and that the case did not raise “points of general public importance”.

He added that McKinnon would be unlikely to succeed with his claim that extradition would breach his right to a private and family life, under Art 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights (the Convention).

He also rejected McKinnon’s argument that extradition to the US would be a breach of his right not to be subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment under Art 3 of the Convention.

This ends McKinnon’s legal options in the UK. However, his solicitors, Kaim Todner, may now decide to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights.
McKinnon’s legal team claim he was looking for reports on UFOs, a subject with which he was obsessed.

A Home Office spokesman commented: “We note the court’s judgment on the 9 October 2009.

“The case remains before the courts; therefore, we do not propose to comment further at this stage.”

Issue: 7389 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Investigations and corporate crime expert joins as partner

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Veteran funds specialist joins investment funds team

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Firm enhances competition practice with London partner hire

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll