Ahmad and others v United Kingdom (App Nos 24027/07, 11949/08, 36742/08, 66911/09 and 67354/09) [2012] All ER (D) 148 (Apr)
The question whether there was a real risk of treatment contrary to Art 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights in another state could not depend on the legal basis of removal for that state. The ruling in Chahal v United Kingdom (Application 22414/93) [1996] ECHR 22414/93 was to be regarded as applying equally to extradition and other types of removal from the territory of a contracting state and was to apply without distinction between the various forms of ill-treatment which were proscribed by Art 3. However, the absolute nature of Art 3 did not mean that any form of ill-treatment would act as a bar to removal from a contracting state.
