header-logo header-logo

Human rights—Privacy—Family

25 March 2010
Issue: 7410 / Categories: Case law , Law reports
printer mail-detail

AD and another v United Kingdom [2010] ECHR 28680/06, [2010] All ER (D) 153 (Mar)

European Court of Human Rights, Judge Garlicki (President), Judges Bratza, Bonello, Mijovic, Sikuta, Poalelungi and Vucinic, and L Early (Section Registrar), 16 March 2010

The removal of a child from his mother on a mistaken assessment of his injuries has been held to have breached Art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and the lack of a domestic remedy for the mother’s claim a breach of Art 13.

The first applicant, AD, was a UK national. The second applicant, OD, was her son, born in 1996. Following action by the local authority on the mistaken assumption OD had suffered non-accidental injuries, the applicants were separated for a period of time.

The applicants brought proceedings in negligence and personal injury, claiming to have suffered damage due to the separation. The judge held that the authority did not owe a duty of care to a parent in the context of care proceedings based on allegations of abuse. The Court of Appeal upheld

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll