header-logo header-logo

14 February 2008
Issue: 7308 / Categories: Features , Human rights , Disciplinary&grievance procedures , Employment
printer mail-detail

A military lottery

The ECtHR ruling in Boyle calls into question the rules surrounding pre-trial detention, say Tim Lawson-Cruttenden and Lacie Kerner

The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) gave its judgment in January in Boyle v (App No 55434/00) [2008] All ER (D) 02 (Jan). The case was in relation to a British Army soldier serving as a gunner with the 12th Regiment Royal Artillery stationed in . The applicant was arrested following an allegation of rape in 1999 and was subsequently charged by his commanding officer (CO) with indecent assault under the Army Act 1955 (AA 1955), s 70. Following the charge, the applicant’s CO ordered detention under close arrest pending trial. The applicant argued in the ECtHR that by placing him under close arrest the CO had infringed his right under Art 5 (right to liberty and security of person) of the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention) on the basis that a CO does not constitute an “officer authorised by law to exercise judicial power” and that his

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

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
Refusing ADR is risky—but not always fatal. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed and Sanjay Dave Singh of the University of Leicester analyse Assensus Ltd v Wirsol Energy Ltd: despite repeated invitations to mediate, the defendant stood firm, made a £100,000 Part 36 offer and was ultimately ‘wholly vindicated’ at trial
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
back-to-top-scroll