header-logo header-logo

01 December 2011
Issue: 7492 / Categories: Case law , Law reports , In Court
printer mail-detail

Human rights—Inhuman or degrading treatment—Effective investigation

R (on the application of Mousa) v Secretary of State for Defence and another [2011] EWCA Civ 1334, [2011] ALl ER (D) 160 (Nov)

Court of Appeal, Civil Division, Lord Justice Maurice Kay VP, Sullivan and Pitchford LJJ, 22 Nov 2011

The Iraq Historic Allegations Team (IHAT), set up to investigate allegations of ill-treatment of Iraqi detainees by members of the British armed forces, does not have the requisite independence to comply with the investigatory obligation under Art 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Michael Fordham QC, Dan Squires and Rachel Logan (instructed by Public Interest Lawyers) for the claimant. James Eadie QC, Philip Havers QC and Kate Grange (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the Secretary of State. David Wolfe for the Equality and Human Rights Commission as intervener.

The defendant secretary of state established a team, the Iraq Historic Allegations Team (IHAT), to investigate allegations of ill treatment by members of the British armed forces against detainees in Iraq during the period 2003 to

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

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

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