header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
10 January 2008
Issue: 7303 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

Public Law Update

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Control Order Cases

Secretary of State for the Home Department v JJ and Ors [2007] UKHL 45, [2007] All ER (D) 489 (Oct)

 

This case concerned the question of whether non-derogating control orders imposed on six individuals under the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 (PTA 2005) breached Art 5 (right to liberty) of the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention).

 

PTA 2005 provides for control orders that place obligations and restrictions on individuals suspected of involvement in terrorism-related activity. There are two different types of control orders:

 

The derogating control order is more restrictive: it imposes obligat be incompatible with liberty under Art 5. D ing control orders can be made pursuant to order (made under th Human Rights Ac 1998, s 14 (1)) designat ing a derogation from Art 5 where there is “a public emergency ”. No designating order for a derogation from Art 5 has been made.

 

The non-derogating control order, where no derogation has been made from Art 5.

 

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll