header-logo header-logo

15 October 2010
Issue: 7437 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

Human rights

JM v United Kingdom [2010] ECHR 37060/06, [2010] All ER (D) 51 (Oct)

For an issue to arise under Art 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights, there had to be a difference in the treatment of persons in relevantly similar situations, such difference being based on one of the grounds expressly or implicitly covered by that provision.

Such a difference in treatment would be discriminatory if it lacked reasonable and objective justification, that was to say it did not pursue a legitimate aim, or if there was no reasonable relationship of proportionality between the means employed and the aim pursued.

There was a margin of appreciation for states in assessing whether and to what extent differences in otherwise similar situations justified a different treatment, and that margin was usually wide when it came to general measures of economic or social strategy. However, where the complaint was one of discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation, the margin of appreciation would be narrow. The state had to be able to point to particularly convincing and weighty reasons

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

42BR Barristers—4 Brick Court

42BR Barristers—4 Brick Court

42BR Barristers to be joined by leading family law set, 4 Brick Court, this summer

Winckworth Sherwood—Rubianka Winspear

Winckworth Sherwood—Rubianka Winspear

Real estate and construction energy offering boosted by partner hire

Gateley Legal—Daniel Walsh

Gateley Legal—Daniel Walsh

Firm bolsters real estate team with partner hire in Birmingham

NEWS
A wave of housing and procedural reforms is set to test the limits of tribunal capacity. In his latest Civil Way column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold charts sweeping change as the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 begins biting
Plans to reduce jury trials risk missing the real problem in the criminal justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, David Wolchover of Ridgeway Chambers argues the crown court backlog is fuelled not by juries but weak cases slipping through a flawed ‘50%’ prosecution test
Emerging technologies may soon transform how courts determine truth in deeply personal disputes. In this week's NLJ, Madhavi Kabra of 1 Hare Court and Harry Lambert of Outer Temple Chambers explore how neurotechnology could reshape family law
A controversial protest case has reignited debate over the limits of free expression. In NLJ this week, Nicholas Dobson examines a Quran-burning incident testing public order law
The courts have drawn a firm line under attempts to extend arbitration appeals. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed of the University of Leicester highlights that if the High Court refuses permission under s 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996, that is the end
back-to-top-scroll